On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:30:18PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> > OT, unrelated thing, in include/asan_interface.h there is one
>> > #if __has_feature(address_sanitizer)
>> > which for GCC should better be:
>> > #if (defined __has_feature && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)) \
>> > || defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
>> > (and similarly in asan_internal.h).
>>
>> z.c:1:44: error: missing binary operator before token "("
>> #if (defined __has_feature && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)) \
>>
>> This should be more like the code below
>>
>> #if !defined(__has_feature)
>> #define __has_feature(x) 0
>> #endif
>> #if __has_feature(address_sanitizer) || defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
>
> I don't care much. Would
> #if (defined(__has_feature) && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)) \
> || defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
> work? In any case, that looks like clang bug, if you have something that
> behaves like a function-like macro, #if defined macro or #ifdef macro
> or #if defined macro || 1 and similar should work just fine, only if
> the macro is followed by ( it should behave differently.
That's gcc:
% cat z.c
#if (defined __has_feature && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)) \
|| defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
#error OK
#else
#error NOOOOO
#endif
% gcc -c -fsanitize=address z.c
z.c:1:44: error: missing binary operator before token "("
#if (defined __has_feature && __has_feature(address_sanitizer)) \
^
z.c:5:2: error: #error NOOOOO
#error NOOOOO
^
% clang -c -fsanitize=address z.c
z.c:3:2: error: OK
#error OK
^
1 error generated.
%
>
>> [hopefully not starting a holly war] Any chance to teach gcc/cpp about
>> __has_feature?
>
> Not for GCC 4.8, that is a new feature, so certainly too late for that.
How about 4.9?
>
> Jakub
