> Since the test on __STRICT_ANSI__ is removed for all other uses, it would > seem consistent to me to remove this one as well. Besides, you are already > testing __GLIBCXX_USE_INT_N_0, which as far as I understand is protected > by !flag_iso (with the exception of size_t).
Yup, I'll clean that up. > > -#if !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__) && defined(_GLIBCXX_USE_INT128) > > + // Conditionalizing on __STRICT_ANSI__ here will break any port that > > + // uses one of these types for size_t. > > +#if defined(__GLIBCXX_USE_INT_N_0) > > template<> > > - struct __is_integral_helper<__int128> > > + struct __is_integral_helper<__GLIBCXX_TYPE_INT_N_0> > > Since the check for __STRICT_ANSI__ is removed, do we need to add > __extension__ in front of __GLIBCXX_TYPE_INT_N_0 to avoid warning with > -Wsystem-headers? I copied the code from the __int128 case, and it explicitly bypassed -Wsystem-headers... so we don't have that problem. Not sure if we *should* have that problem, but we didn't before... I can only assume that either (1) someone found it too difficult to get __extension__ to work right in all those cases, or (2) it's a bug. Or (3) for some reason they decided to do it that way anyway. I don't know. > That seems complicated. You just need to call emit_support_tinfo_1 on > each of the types (see how fundamentals is used at the end of the > function), no need to put everything in the array. Sure, *now* you tell me that :-) I can do it either way, but it's the same overhead to iterate through the types. Shoving it into the array is a bit more future-proof, but keeping the index in sync is a bit of work if the table ever changes. Your choice ;-)
