On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Rainer Orth wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > > On 26/11/19 00:57 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > >>On Mon, 25 Nov 2019, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> > >>> and a few more, all DFP related. They used to be emitted by g++ for > >>> __fundamental_type_info in libsupc++/fundamental_type_info.cc and lived > >>> in the CXXABI_1.3.4 version. However, since Solaris *does* lack DFP > >>> support, that's no longer the case. I'm uncertain how best to deal with > >>> this, however. > >> > >>As I understand it, _GLIBCXX_USE_DECIMAL_FLOAT should already have been > >>undefined for this target, and so std::decimal::decimal32 etc. should not > >>have been usable (both the header not working without that define, and the > >>mode attributes in the header being rejected by the front end when DFP is > >>unsupported). I.e. such defines in libsupc++ would never have been usable > >>on this target, so I think they are something it should be safe to remove > >>from the ABI baseline. > > > > If it's actually impossible that any real program could have depended > > on those symbols, then I agree. > > this is exactly what I've got no way of telling, that's why I was asking > for guidance. Just removing the DFP symbols from the baselines works, > of course.
I don't think any real program could have used those symbols; it would have required using __typeof (__builtin_fabsd32 (0)) or similar to access types that weren't normally available for those targets (and by accessing the types using builtins like that, you're getting a completely undefined function-calling ABI for them anyway). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
