This is the mail archive of the newlib@sourceware.org mailing list for the newlib project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On May 9 12:01, zosrothko wrote: > Corinna > Le 09/05/2014 10:43, Corinna Vinschen a Ãcrit : > >On May 9 07:52, zosrothko wrote: > >>Hi Corinna > >> > >>I made a typo in my previous patch. Here the corrected one. > >Thanks. Your patches are missing a matching ChangeLog entry, btw. > > > >However, on second thought I'm not sure that removing the 'i' variations > >of the functions from "__cplusplus >= 201103L" in this way is such a > >good idea. > > > >The 'i' functions are a newlib extension for embedded targets. > > > >They are not part of any standard, so they are certainly neither part > >of "__cplusplus >= 201103L", nor part of "__STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L". > > > >So, either we remove these functions from both standards, or we include > >them in both standards. > > > >But if we remove them from both standards when will they be defined at > >all? This should be cleared up before making this change. > > > >Is defining them with only > > > > #if !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__) > > > >sufficient? > That won't work because of this > > $ g++ -xc++ -std=c++11 -dM -E - < /dev/null | sort | grep ANSI > #define __STRICT_ANSI__ 1 > > $ g++ -xc++ -std=gnu++11 -dM -E - < /dev/null | sort | grep ANSI Are you sure? Your example seems to indicate that #if !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__) is ok for the 'i' functions. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer Red Hat
Attachment:
pgpQzq6D7JRm5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |