Re: [Fwd: Re: gnuplot numerical errors on Intel MacBook]

[<br...@ph...>]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:

> OK, here's the first mention of signgam.  Is it stating that signgam 
> is supposed to be present and related to lgamma()?  Not directly, and
>  for that reason I'm not sure that is what is meant.  What is "Single
>  Unix"?

The Single Unix Specification. That's the definition of what it means
for an operating system to be "Unix" (or compatible to it), these days.
Google finds it.

> I still haven't seen anything that specifically calls out that in C99
> lgamma() must or should support signgam.

That's because it's not there.  I stated this as fact from memory, but 
it turned out to be wrong on re-reading the document.