https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100157
--- Comment #9 from Vittorio Romeo <vittorio.romeo at outlook dot com> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > (In reply to Vittorio Romeo from comment #6) > > worthwhile to keep the same name as Clang for compatibility, > > No, that's not an option. Clang's is a built-in template, GCC's can't be (it > would require considerable internal reworking to support that). > > That's also why we have __integer_pack(N)... instead of __make_integer_seq<>. > > Since GCC's built-in has to use different syntax, it would be a disaster to > use the same name. > > #if __has_builtin(__type_pack_element) > // now what? is it a template or a function? > #endif Got it, I didn't realize that they had to be wildly different. I guess that as long as a library developer can wrap either under a portable macro, it should be fine.
