http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54847
--- Comment #20 from Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <jeremyhu at macports dot org> 2012-10-07 23:25:54 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) > To repeat what I meant: the autoconf test is built by the C++ compiler. Given > that, writing 'timespec' or writing 'struct timespec' is exactly the same. C++ lets you just drop "struct"? My C++ is very rusty, and I didn't realize that. That seems messy. Thanks for the info. > Just > wanted to clarify why, even from a formal point of view, the patch cannot be > right, I didn't really mean to analyze in any detail the existing autoconf > test > (I didn't write this specific one, IIRC). Again send patches to libstdc++, > possibly CC Jon. Yeah, that's why I'm suggesting just dropping the check for _POSIX_TIMERS > 0 ... that check seems weird to me, and Jack's test seems to indicate that it's not needed.
