On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:23 PM Michael D Kinney
<michael.d.kin...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> After trying a few GCC experiments, there does not appear to be any way to
> work around “xor” keyword.
>
>
>
> I recommend we update EDK II sources to not use c++ keywords to avoid this
> issue all together.
>
>
>
> This may require changes that do not match names from industry standard specs.
This is a crappy problem but it's workaroundable in the header by
using something like:
#ifdef __cplusplus
#define SOME_MEMBER_NAME alternative_name
#else
#define SOME_MEMBER_NAME bad_name
#endif
and then in the struct...
struct Foo
{
UINTN SOME_MEMBER_NAME;
};
It should work around these C++ issues while keeping compat with existing code.
Although yes, avoiding C++ keywords is a good idea, particularly if
you're planning to bring more C++ into edk2.
--
Pedro
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#105285): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/105285
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/99079638/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
