Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 4 - Test suite.
Am 07.09.2014 um 03:48 schrieb Ed Smith-Rowland:
Greetings,
I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
This adds front end and preprocessor tests for the language feature tests and
__has_include.
I am still working on the fifth and last in this series to add
__had_cpp_attribute but these first four patches add a very useful subset of
the
SD-6 feature testing.
Bootstrapped and tested under x86_64-linux.
apparently this was checked in on the 4.9 branch as well. However the cxx14.X
testcase fails with:
ERROR: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++98: syntax error in target selector
target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++98: syntax error in target
selector target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
ERROR: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++11: syntax error in target selector
target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++11: syntax error in target
selector target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
ERROR: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++1y: syntax error in target selector
target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C -std=gnu++1y: syntax error in target
selector target c++14 for dg-do 1 compile { target c++14 }
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 10/01/2014 11:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 02/09/14 10:24 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h(revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h(working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the
corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures,
could you look into it please?
OK,
Here is the patch.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
FWIW, I remember a svn tree corruption while getting this patch ready.
I should have retested everything in the new tree.
Sorry everyone!
2014-10-02 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
* include/bits/stl_function.h: generic associative lookup feature
is not supported.
* testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc:experimental/any is
actually available.
* testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc: Add test for __cpp_lib_is_final.
* testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/literals/range.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg1.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg2.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg3.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/23_containers/array/tuple_interface/get_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/23_containers/array/tuple_interface/tuple_element_neg.cc:
Adjust.
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h (revision 215788)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h (working copy)
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@
#if __cplusplus 201103L
#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
-#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
+//#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
template
struct plusvoid
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (revision 215788)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (working copy)
@@ -12,9 +12,9 @@
//# error experimental/net
//#endif
-//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
-//# error experimental/any
-//#endif
+#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+# error experimental/any
+#endif
//#if !__has_include(experimental/memory_resource)
//# error experimental/memory_resource
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc(revision 215788)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc(working copy)
@@ -78,11 +78,11 @@
# error __cpp_lib_complex_udls != 201309
#endif
-#ifndef __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup
-# error __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup
-#elif __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup != 201304
-# error __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup != 201304
-#endif
+//#ifndef __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup
+//# error __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup
+//#elif __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup != 201304
+//# error __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup != 201304
+//#endif
//#ifndef __cpp_lib_null_iterators
//# error __cpp_lib_null_iterators
@@ -111,3 +111,9 @@
#elif __cpp_lib_shared_timed_mutex != 201402
# error __cpp_lib_shared_timed_mutex != 201402
#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_lib_is_final
+# error __cpp_lib_is_final
+#elif __cpp_lib_is_final != 201402
+# error __cpp_lib_is_final != 201402
+#endif
Index: testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc
===
--- testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc (revision 215788)
+++
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 10/02/2014 02:51 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 10/01/2014 11:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 02/09/14 10:24 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h(revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h(working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the
corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures,
could you look into it please?
OK,
Here is the patch.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
FWIW, I remember a svn tree corruption while getting this patch ready.
I should have retested everything in the new tree.
Sorry everyone!
Here is a front-end test patch.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
2014-10-02 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98-neg.C: Fix double negative thinko and
add many more tests.
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98-neg.C
===
--- g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98-neg.C (revision 215793)
+++ g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98-neg.C (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,99 @@
// { dg-do compile { target c++98_only } }
// { dg-options -ansi }
-#ifdef __cpp_runtime_arrays
+#ifndef __cpp_runtime_arrays
# error __cpp_runtime_arrays // { dg-error error }
#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_unicode_characters
+# error __cpp_unicode_characters // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_raw_strings
+# error __cpp_raw_strings // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_unicode_literals
+# error __cpp_unicode_literals // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_user_defined_literals
+# error __cpp_user_defined_literals // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_lambdas
+# error __cpp_lambdas // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_constexpr
+# error __cpp_constexpr // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_static_assert
+# error __cpp_static_assert // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_decltype
+# error __cpp_decltype // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_attributes
+# error __cpp_attributes // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_rvalue_reference
+# error __cpp_rvalue_reference // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_variadic_templates
+# error __cpp_variadic_templates // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_alias_templates
+# error __cpp_alias_templates // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+// C++14
+
+// C++98 gets binary literals.
+//#ifndef __cpp_binary_literals
+//# error __cpp_binary_literals
+//#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_init_captures
+# error __cpp_init_captures // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_generic_lambdas
+# error __cpp_generic_lambdas // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_decltype_auto
+# error __cpp_decltype_auto // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_return_type_deduction
+# error __cpp_return_type_deduction // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+// Aggregate initializers not in yet.
+//#ifdef __cpp_aggregate_nsdmi
+//# error __cpp_aggregate_nsdmi
+//#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_variable_templates
+# error __cpp_variable_templates // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_digit_separators
+# error __cpp_digit_separators // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_attribute_deprecated
+# error __cpp_attribute_deprecated // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+// Sized deallocation not in yet.
+//#ifdef __cpp_sized_deallocation
+//# error __cpp_sized_deallocation
+//#endif
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 02/10/14 02:51 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: On 10/01/2014 11:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures, could you look into it please? OK, Here is the patch. Built and tested on x86_64-linux. OK? Yes, the library change is OK, thanks for the quick fix.
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
Hi,
On 10/02/2014 10:08 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:51 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 10/01/2014 11:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 02/09/14 10:24 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h(revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h(working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc(working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the
corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures,
could you look into it please?
OK,
Here is the patch.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
FWIW, I remember a svn tree corruption while getting this patch ready.
I should have retested everything in the new tree.
Sorry everyone!
Here is a front-end test patch.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Having double checked that it works to avoid the spurious fail, I'm
going to apply the patch as obvious.
Thanks,
Paolo.
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 02/09/14 10:24 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h (working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the
corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures,
could you look into it please?
Re: Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 10/01/14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 02/09/14 10:24 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h (working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Ed, the commit at http://gcc.gnu.org/r215752 doesn't have the
corrections I asked for above and causes a number of test failures,
could you look into it please?
I swore I put these changes in.
I'll fix these ASAP.
Ed
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
On 09/29/2014 11:18 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
+ /* Nonzero to prevent macro expansion. */
+ unsigned char in__has_include__;
I don't see anything checking this flag to prevent macro expansion.
Does the comment just need a change?
+ /* Binary literals and variable length arrays have been allowed in g++
+before C++11 and were standardized for C++14. */
+ if (!pedantic || cxx_dialect cxx11)
+ {
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_binary_literals=201304);
+ }
This comment also needs an update.
+// Try a macro.
+#define COMPLEX_INC complex.h
+#if __has_include(COMPLEX_INC)
+#else
+# error COMPLEX_INC
+#endif
Are you sure this is what SD-6 means? I interpret it as trying to
specify something equivalent to the #include directive, namely that
first we look for an explicit header-name, then try a more flexible
parse that should include macro expansion. But this can wait for a
clarification from SG10.
The patch is OK with those comment tweaks.
Jason
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
On 09/25/2014 12:57 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 09/01/2014 09:34 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
(open_file_failed()): Not an error to not find a header file for
__has_include__.
Hmm, looks like this means that __has_include__ will silently return
false if a header exists but is unreadable; I would think that we want
it to be true (and have an error when the user tries to include it).
Jason
Here is the new patch series.
A patch addressing C++11 [[deprecated]] is coming later when these are
in as is a library patch for std::is_final.
I flipped the logic on the libcpp functions because there was a double
negative of sorts - the logic was confusing to me on second look.
Also, a file that a user can't read for permissions still returns true
with __has_include.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
OK?
2014-09-29 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
Implement SD-6: SG10 Feature Test Recommendations
* internal.h (lexer_state, spec_nodes): Add in__has_include__.
* directives.c: Support __has_include__ builtin.
* expr.c (parse_has_include): New function to parse __has_include__
builtin; (eval_token()): Use it.
* files.c (_cpp_has_header()): New funtion to look for header;
(open_file_failed()): Not an error to not find a header file for
__has_include__.
* identifiers.c (_cpp_init_hashtable()): Add entry for __has_include__.
* pch.c (cpp_read_state): Lookup __has_include__.
* traditional.c (enum ls, _cpp_scan_out_logical_line()): Walk through
__has_include__ statements.
Index: internal.h
===
--- internal.h (revision 215628)
+++ internal.h (working copy)
@@ -258,6 +258,9 @@
/* Nonzero when parsing arguments to a function-like macro. */
unsigned char parsing_args;
+ /* Nonzero to prevent macro expansion. */
+ unsigned char in__has_include__;
+
/* Nonzero if prevent_expansion is true only because output is
being discarded. */
unsigned char discarding_output;
@@ -279,6 +282,8 @@
cpp_hashnode *n_true;/* C++ keyword true */
cpp_hashnode *n_false; /* C++ keyword false */
cpp_hashnode *n__VA_ARGS__; /* C99 vararg macros */
+ cpp_hashnode *n__has_include__; /* __has_include__ operator */
+ cpp_hashnode *n__has_include_next__; /* __has_include_next__ operator */
};
typedef struct _cpp_line_note _cpp_line_note;
@@ -645,6 +650,8 @@
extern bool _cpp_read_file_entries (cpp_reader *, FILE *);
extern const char *_cpp_get_file_name (_cpp_file *);
extern struct stat *_cpp_get_file_stat (_cpp_file *);
+extern bool _cpp_has_header (cpp_reader *, const char *, int,
+enum include_type);
/* In expr.c */
extern bool _cpp_parse_expr (cpp_reader *, bool);
@@ -680,6 +687,7 @@
extern void _cpp_do_file_change (cpp_reader *, enum lc_reason, const char *,
linenum_type, unsigned int);
extern void _cpp_pop_buffer (cpp_reader *);
+extern char *_cpp_bracket_include (cpp_reader *);
/* In directives.c */
struct _cpp_dir_only_callbacks
Index: directives.c
===
--- directives.c(revision 215628)
+++ directives.c(working copy)
@@ -566,6 +566,11 @@
if (is_def_or_undef node == pfile-spec_nodes.n_defined)
cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
\defined\ cannot be used as a macro name);
+ else if (is_def_or_undef
+(node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include__
+|| node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include_next__))
+ cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
+ \__has_include__\ cannot be used as a macro name);
else if (! (node-flags NODE_POISONED))
return node;
}
@@ -2623,3 +2628,12 @@
node-directive_index = i;
}
}
+
+/* Extract header file from a bracket include. Parsing starts after ''.
+ The string is malloced and must be freed by the caller. */
+char *
+_cpp_bracket_include(cpp_reader *pfile)
+{
+ return glue_header_name (pfile);
+}
+
Index: expr.c
===
--- expr.c (revision 215628)
+++ expr.c (working copy)
@@ -64,6 +64,8 @@
static unsigned int interpret_int_suffix (cpp_reader *, const uchar *, size_t);
static void check_promotion (cpp_reader *, const struct op *);
+static cpp_num parse_has_include (cpp_reader *, enum include_type);
+
/* Token type abuse to create unary plus and minus operators. */
#define CPP_UPLUS ((enum cpp_ttype) (CPP_LAST_CPP_OP + 1))
#define CPP_UMINUS ((enum cpp_ttype) (CPP_LAST_CPP_OP + 2))
@@ -1048,6 +1050,10 @@
case CPP_NAME:
if (token-val.node.node == pfile-spec_nodes.n_defined)
return parse_defined (pfile);
+ else if (token-val.node.node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include__)
+ return
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
On 09/25/2014 12:57 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 09/01/2014 09:34 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: (open_file_failed()): Not an error to not find a header file for __has_include__. Hmm, looks like this means that __has_include__ will silently return false if a header exists but is unreadable; I would think that we want it to be true (and have an error when the user tries to include it). Jason I have changed __has_include__ to return true if a header exists but is unreadable. Then I tried to see if an error would occur for a header of permission 000. Just including it gives a permission error. Putting it into an #if block does not. --- ed@bad-horse:~/tr2$ ls -l hidden.h -- 1 ed ed 0 Sep 26 10:27 hidden.h --- // Try header that exists but we can't read. #if __has_include(hidden.h) # warning found hidden.h # include hidden.h // No error! #else # error hidden.h #endif #if 1 # include hidden.h // No error! #endif --- Is this a bug in cpp? I'm going to submit new patches that answer all your questions. As far as this one goes I do no worse than current behavior. As for [[deprecated]] for C++11 I'll add another patch on top of the four. Ed
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros.
On 09/25/2014 01:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 09/01/2014 09:41 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: + cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_attribute_deprecated=201309); Don't we support attribute deprecated in C++11? Jason We support [[gnu::deprecated]] in C++11 bit not [[deprecated]] until C++14. Ed
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros.
On 09/26/2014 10:20 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: On 09/25/2014 01:40 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: Don't we support attribute deprecated in C++11? We support [[gnu::deprecated]] in C++11 bit not [[deprecated]] until C++14. Hmm, that seems unnecessary. I'd allow it in C++11 as well, and *maybe* complain if -pedantic; 7.6/5 says For an attribute-token not specified in this International Standard, the behavior is implementation defined so allowing it is conforming. Jason
[PING 2, PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part N/4.
*PING* I would like review of my SD-6 implementation. Part 1 - __has_include__ built-in in libcpp. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00083.html Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00084.html Part 3 - libstdc++ library macros was already approved by Jonathan. Thank you. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00085.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00110.html Part 4 - C++ front end tests. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00553.html These build and test cleanly on x86_64-linux. Part 5 - __has_cpp_attribute and supporting machinery is proving more interesting than I thought. But the rest should be put in. Thank you, Ed Smith-Rowland
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
On 09/01/2014 09:34 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: (open_file_failed()): Not an error to not find a header file for __has_include__. Hmm, looks like this means that __has_include__ will silently return false if a header exists but is unreadable; I would think that we want it to be true (and have an error when the user tries to include it). Jason
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros.
On 09/01/2014 09:41 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
+ /* Return type deduction was added as an extension to C++11
+and was standardized for C+14. */
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_return_type_deduction=201304);
When I try to use it with -std=c++11 I get
wa.C:1:8: error: ‘f’ function uses ‘auto’ type specifier without
trailing return type
auto f() { return 42; }
^
wa.C:1:8: note: deduced return type only available with -std=c++14 or
-std=gnu++14
Let's move it to the C++14 section.
There is one bit: arrays of runtime bound. These got kicked out of C++14 I
think and is languishing in a TS.
OTOH, we still support it. It's better than the C99 version we supported.
What direction should I take?
/* Runtime sized arrays
+have C++14 semantics even for C++98. */
The comment is inaccurate; most of the restrictions on arrays of runtime
bound are only applied in C++14 mode. Let's put this macro in the C++14
section as well until there's a value or separate macro indicating C99
VLA support.
Jason
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros.
On 09/01/2014 09:41 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: + cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_attribute_deprecated=201309); Don't we support attribute deprecated in C++11? Jason
[PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 4 - Test suite.
Greetings,
I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
This adds front end and preprocessor tests for the language feature tests and
__has_include.
I am still working on the fifth and last in this series to add
__had_cpp_attribute but these first four patches add a very useful subset of
the SD-6 feature testing.
Bootstrapped and tested under x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
2014-09-06 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
Implement SD-6: SG10 Feature Test Recommendations
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11-neg.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx98-neg.C: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/phoobhar.h: New.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/testinc/phoobhar.h: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11-neg.C
===
--- g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11-neg.C (revision 0)
+++ g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11-neg.C (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11_only } }
+// { dg-options -pedantic-errors }
+
+// These *are* defined in C++14 onwards.
+
+#ifndef __cpp_binary_literals
+# error __cpp_binary_literals // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_init_captures
+# error __cpp_init_captures // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_generic_lambdas
+# error __cpp_generic_lambdas // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_decltype_auto
+# error __cpp_decltype_auto // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_runtime_arrays
+# error __cpp_runtime_arrays // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_digit_separators
+# error __cpp_digit_separators // { dg-error error }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_attribute_deprecated
+# error __cpp_attribute_deprecated // { dg-error error }
+#endif
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11.C
===
--- g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11.C (revision 0)
+++ g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx11.C (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++11 }
+
+#ifndef __cpp_unicode_characters
+# error __cpp_unicode_characters
+#elif __cpp_unicode_characters != 200704
+# error __cpp_unicode_characters != 200704
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_raw_strings
+# error __cpp_raw_strings
+#elif __cpp_raw_strings != 200710
+# error __cpp_raw_strings != 200710
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_unicode_literals
+# error __cpp_unicode_literals
+#elif __cpp_unicode_literals != 200710
+# error __cpp_unicode_literals != 200710
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_user_defined_literals
+# error __cpp_user_defined_literals
+#elif __cpp_user_defined_literals != 200809
+# error __cpp_user_defined_literals != 200809
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_lambdas
+# error __cpp_lambdas
+#elif __cpp_lambdas != 200907
+# error __cpp_lambdas != 200907
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_constexpr
+# error __cpp_constexpr
+#elif __cpp_constexpr != 200704
+# error __cpp_constexpr != 200704
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_static_assert
+# error __cpp_static_assert
+#elif __cpp_static_assert != 200410
+# error __cpp_static_assert != 200410
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_decltype
+# error __cpp_decltype
+#elif __cpp_decltype != 200707
+# error __cpp_decltype != 200707
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_attributes
+# error __cpp_attributes
+#elif __cpp_attributes != 200809
+# error __cpp_attributes != 200809
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_rvalue_reference
+# error __cpp_rvalue_reference
+#elif __cpp_rvalue_reference != 200610
+# error __cpp_rvalue_reference != 200610
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_variadic_templates
+# error __cpp_variadic_templates
+#elif __cpp_variadic_templates != 200704
+# error __cpp_variadic_templates != 200704
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_alias_templates
+# error __cpp_alias_templates
+#elif __cpp_alias_templates != 200704
+# error __cpp_alias_templates != 200704
+#endif
+
+// This C++14 feature was developed as an extension for C++11.
+#ifndef __cpp_return_type_deduction
+# error __cpp_return_type_deduction
+#elif __cpp_return_type_deduction != 201304
+# error __cpp_return_type_deduction != 201304
+#endif
+
+// These C++14 features are allowed in C++11 in non-ANSI modes.
+#ifndef __cpp_binary_literals
+# error __cpp_binary_literals
+#elif __cpp_binary_literals != 201304
+# error __cpp_binary_literals != 201304
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __cpp_runtime_arrays
+# error __cpp_runtime_arrays
+#elif __cpp_runtime_arrays != 201304
+# error __cpp_runtime_arrays != 201304
+#endif
Index: g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C
===
--- g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C (revision 0)
+++ g++.dg/cpp1y/feat-cxx14.C (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,232 @@
+// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
+// { dg-options -I${srcdir}/g++.dg/cpp1y -I${srcdir}/g++.dg/cpp1y/testinc }
+
+// Begin C++11 tests.
+
+#ifndef __cpp_unicode_characters
+# error __cpp_unicode_characters
+#elif __cpp_unicode_characters != 200704
+# error __cpp_unicode_characters != 200704
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
On 01/09/14 21:46 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h (working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
The generic associative lookup feature is not supported.
Index: testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc
===
--- testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// { dg-options -std=gnu++14 }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+#include experimental/optional
+#include experimental/string_view
+
+#if !__has_include(experimental/optional)
+# error experimental/optional
+#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/net)
+//# error experimental/net
+//#endif
+
+//#if !__has_include(experimental/any)
+//# error experimental/any
+//#endif
This can be uncommented, experimental/any is available.
OK with those changes.
Once committed, can you update https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/changes.html
to say GCC follows the SD-6 recommendations?
Thanks.
[PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
Greetings,
I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
This first part adds a __has_include__ built-in that will return true if
a header exists.
I also added __has_include_next__ as an extension. Clang has this
extension.
Both these built-ins will be wrapped in function type macros in a later
patch to c-family.
As written, these are available to the whole C-family rather than just C++.
I think this makes a valuable addition for everyone.
(I sort of wonder why this wasn't added to the actual preprocessor 20
years ago.)
Bootstrapped and tested under x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
2014-09-02 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
Implement SD-6: SG10 Feature Test Recommendations
* internal.h (lexer_state, spec_nodes): Add in__has_include__.
* directives.c: Support __has_include__ builtin.
* expr.c (parse_has_include): New function to parse __has_include__
builtin; (eval_token()): Use it.
* files.c (_cpp_has_header()): New funtion to look for header;
(open_file_failed()): Not an error to not find a header file for
__has_include__.
* identifiers.c (_cpp_init_hashtable()): Add entry for __has_include__.
* pch.c (cpp_read_state): Lookup __has_include__.
* traditional.c (enum ls, _cpp_scan_out_logical_line()): Walk through
__has_include__ statements.
Index: internal.h
===
--- internal.h (revision 214680)
+++ internal.h (working copy)
@@ -258,6 +258,9 @@
/* Nonzero when parsing arguments to a function-like macro. */
unsigned char parsing_args;
+ /* Nonzero to prevent macro expansion. */
+ unsigned char in__has_include__;
+
/* Nonzero if prevent_expansion is true only because output is
being discarded. */
unsigned char discarding_output;
@@ -279,6 +282,8 @@
cpp_hashnode *n_true;/* C++ keyword true */
cpp_hashnode *n_false; /* C++ keyword false */
cpp_hashnode *n__VA_ARGS__; /* C99 vararg macros */
+ cpp_hashnode *n__has_include__; /* __has_include__ operator */
+ cpp_hashnode *n__has_include_next__; /* __has_include_next__ operator */
};
typedef struct _cpp_line_note _cpp_line_note;
@@ -645,6 +650,8 @@
extern bool _cpp_read_file_entries (cpp_reader *, FILE *);
extern const char *_cpp_get_file_name (_cpp_file *);
extern struct stat *_cpp_get_file_stat (_cpp_file *);
+extern bool _cpp_has_header (cpp_reader *, const char *, int,
+enum include_type);
/* In expr.c */
extern bool _cpp_parse_expr (cpp_reader *, bool);
@@ -680,6 +687,7 @@
extern void _cpp_do_file_change (cpp_reader *, enum lc_reason, const char *,
linenum_type, unsigned int);
extern void _cpp_pop_buffer (cpp_reader *);
+extern char *_cpp_bracket_include (cpp_reader *);
/* In directives.c */
struct _cpp_dir_only_callbacks
Index: directives.c
===
--- directives.c(revision 214680)
+++ directives.c(working copy)
@@ -549,6 +549,11 @@
if (is_def_or_undef node == pfile-spec_nodes.n_defined)
cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
\defined\ cannot be used as a macro name);
+ else if (is_def_or_undef
+(node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include__
+|| node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include_next__))
+ cpp_error (pfile, CPP_DL_ERROR,
+ \__has_include__\ cannot be used as a macro name);
else if (! (node-flags NODE_POISONED))
return node;
}
@@ -2601,3 +2606,12 @@
node-directive_index = i;
}
}
+
+/* Extract header file from a bracket include. Parsing starts after ''.
+ The string is malloced and must be freed by the caller. */
+char *
+_cpp_bracket_include(cpp_reader *pfile)
+{
+ return glue_header_name (pfile);
+}
+
Index: expr.c
===
--- expr.c (revision 214680)
+++ expr.c (working copy)
@@ -64,6 +64,8 @@
static unsigned int interpret_int_suffix (cpp_reader *, const uchar *, size_t);
static void check_promotion (cpp_reader *, const struct op *);
+static cpp_num parse_has_include (cpp_reader *, enum include_type);
+
/* Token type abuse to create unary plus and minus operators. */
#define CPP_UPLUS ((enum cpp_ttype) (CPP_LAST_CPP_OP + 1))
#define CPP_UMINUS ((enum cpp_ttype) (CPP_LAST_CPP_OP + 2))
@@ -1048,6 +1050,10 @@
case CPP_NAME:
if (token-val.node.node == pfile-spec_nodes.n_defined)
return parse_defined (pfile);
+ else if (token-val.node.node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include__)
+ return parse_has_include (pfile, IT_INCLUDE);
+ else if (token-val.node.node == pfile-spec_nodes.n__has_include_next__)
+ return parse_has_include (pfile, IT_INCLUDE_NEXT);
else if (CPP_OPTION (pfile, cplusplus)
[PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 2 - __has_include macro and C++ language feature macros.
Greetings,
I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
This second part adds a __has_include function-like macro that will
return true if a header exists. I also added a __has_include_next
function-like macro as an extension. Clang has this extension.
These macros just wrap the built-ins introduced in the previous patch.
As requested by folk I have rearranged which language-feature macros are
available with what .
There is one bit: arrays of runtime bound. These got kicked out of C++14 I
think and is languishing in a TS.
OTOH, we still support it. It's better than the C99 version we supported.
What direction should I take?
Bootstrapped and tested under x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
2014-09-02 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
Implement SD-6: SG10 Feature Test Recommendations
* c-cppbuiltin.c (c_cpp_builtins()): Define language feature
macros and the __has_header macro.
Index: c-cppbuiltin.c
===
--- c-cppbuiltin.c (revision 214680)
+++ c-cppbuiltin.c (working copy)
@@ -794,6 +794,12 @@
/* For stddef.h. They require macros defined in c-common.c. */
c_stddef_cpp_builtins ();
+ /* Set include test macros for all C/C++ (not for just C++11 etc.)
+ the builtins __has_include__ and __has_include_next__ are defined
+ in libcpp. */
+ cpp_define (pfile, __has_include(STR)=__has_include__(STR));
+ cpp_define (pfile, __has_include_next(STR)=__has_include_next__(STR));
+
if (c_dialect_cxx ())
{
if (flag_weak SUPPORTS_ONE_ONLY)
@@ -800,12 +806,57 @@
cpp_define (pfile, __GXX_WEAK__=1);
else
cpp_define (pfile, __GXX_WEAK__=0);
+
if (warn_deprecated)
cpp_define (pfile, __DEPRECATED);
+
if (flag_rtti)
cpp_define (pfile, __GXX_RTTI);
+
if (cxx_dialect = cxx11)
cpp_define (pfile, __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__);
+
+ /* Binary literals and variable length arrays have been allowed in g++
+before C++11 and were standardized for C++14. Runtime sized arrays
+have C++14 semantics even for C++98. */
+ if (!pedantic || cxx_dialect cxx11)
+ {
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_binary_literals=201304);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_runtime_arrays=201304);
+ }
+ if (cxx_dialect = cxx11)
+ {
+ /* Set feature test macros for C++11 */
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_unicode_characters=200704);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_raw_strings=200710);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_unicode_literals=200710);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_user_defined_literals=200809);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_lambdas=200907);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_constexpr=200704);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_static_assert=200410);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_decltype=200707);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_attributes=200809);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_rvalue_reference=200610);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_variadic_templates=200704);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_alias_templates=200704);
+ /* Return type deduction was added as an extension to C++11
+and was standardized for C+14. */
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_return_type_deduction=201304);
+ }
+ if (cxx_dialect cxx11)
+ {
+ /* Set feature test macros for C++14 */
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_init_captures=201304);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_generic_lambdas=201304);
+ //cpp_undef (pfile, __cpp_constexpr);
+ //cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_constexpr=201304);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_decltype_auto=201304);
+ //cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_aggregate_nsdmi=201304);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_variable_templates=201304);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_digit_separators=201309);
+ cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_attribute_deprecated=201309);
+ //cpp_define (pfile, __cpp_sized_deallocation=201309);
+ }
}
/* Note that we define this for C as well, so that we know if
__attribute__((cleanup)) will interface with EH. */
[PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 3 - .
Greetings,
I am finally getting back to my SD-6 C++ features test work.
This adds feature macros to various libstdc++ components.
The new version of SD-6 cleans up the shared_mutex noise.
Some libraries that were moved to different tSen are still given macros as they
are in the SD-6 draft.
Bootstrapped and tested under x86_64-linux.
OK?
Ed
2014-09-02 Edward Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
Implement SD-6: SG10 Feature Test Recommendations
* include/bits/basic_string.h: Add __cpp_lib feature test macro.
* include/bits/stl_algobase.h: Ditto.
* include/bits/stl_function.h: Ditto.
* include/bits/unique_ptr.h: Ditto.
* include/std/chrono: Ditto.
* include/std/complex: Ditto.
* include/std/iomanip: Ditto.
* include/std/shared_mutex: Ditto.
* include/std/tuple: Ditto.
* include/std/type_traits: Ditto.
* include/std/utility: Ditto.
* testsuite/experimental/feat-cxx14.cc: New.
* testsuite/experimental/feat-lib-fund.cc: New.
* testsuite/20_util/declval/requirements/1_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/literals/range.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg1.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg2.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/duration/requirements/typedefs_neg3.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/make_signed/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/20_util/make_unsigned/requirements/typedefs_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/23_containers/array/tuple_interface/get_neg.cc: Adjust.
* testsuite/23_containers/array/tuple_interface/tuple_element_neg.cc:
Adjust.
Index: include/bits/basic_string.h
===
--- include/bits/basic_string.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/basic_string.h (working copy)
@@ -3140,6 +3140,8 @@
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+#define __cpp_lib_string_udls 201304
+
inline namespace literals
{
inline namespace string_literals
Index: include/bits/stl_algobase.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_algobase.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_algobase.h (working copy)
@@ -1091,6 +1091,9 @@
}
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_robust_nonmodifying_seq_ops 201304
+
/**
* @brief Tests a range for element-wise equality.
* @ingroup non_mutating_algorithms
Index: include/bits/stl_function.h
===
--- include/bits/stl_function.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/stl_function.h (working copy)
@@ -217,6 +217,10 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_transparent_operators 201210
+#define __cpp_lib_generic_associative_lookup 201304
+
template
struct plusvoid
{
Index: include/bits/unique_ptr.h
===
--- include/bits/unique_ptr.h (revision 214680)
+++ include/bits/unique_ptr.h (working copy)
@@ -743,6 +743,9 @@
};
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+
+#define __cpp_lib_make_unique 201304
+
templatetypename _Tp
struct _MakeUniq
{ typedef unique_ptr_Tp __single_object; };
Index: include/std/chrono
===
--- include/std/chrono (revision 214680)
+++ include/std/chrono (working copy)
@@ -782,6 +782,8 @@
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+#define __cpp_lib_chrono_udls 201304
+
inline namespace literals
{
inline namespace chrono_literals
Index: include/std/complex
===
--- include/std/complex (revision 214680)
+++ include/std/complex (working copy)
@@ -1929,6 +1929,8 @@
inline namespace literals {
inline namespace complex_literals {
+#define __cpp_lib_complex_udls 201309
+
constexpr std::complexfloat
operatorif(long double __num)
{ return std::complexfloat{0.0F, static_castfloat(__num)}; }
Index: include/std/iomanip
===
--- include/std/iomanip (revision 214680)
+++ include/std/iomanip (working copy)
@@ -339,6 +339,8 @@
#if __cplusplus 201103L
+#define __cpp_lib_quoted_string_io 201304
+
_GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_VERSION
namespace __detail {
_GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
Index: include/std/shared_mutex
===
--- include/std/shared_mutex(revision 214680)
+++ include/std/shared_mutex(working copy)
@@ -52,6 +52,9 @@
*/
#if defined(_GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS) defined(_GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDINT_TR1)
+
+#define __cpp_lib_shared_timed_mutex 201402
+
/// shared_timed_mutex
class shared_timed_mutex
{
Index: include/std/tuple
===
--- include/std/tuple (revision 214680)
+++
[PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation
The Fourth installment, testing and other oddments will be sent tomorrow. The implementation of __has_cpp_attribute is underway and will come in a few days as a Fifth installment (modulo bugs this should be all). I have it working in C++. I feel though that it would be welcome as it is in clang for all C-family languages. I intend to offer a __has_attribute for all C languages. The __has_cpp_attribute will just be for C++. Thiago, I did not mean to clobber your work. This has been baking for a while (last patches in June) and I just got back to it after a break with little useful attention to g++. Perhaps we can combine our work. I'll look over your patch. I know you want this to support Qt ;-) I think this effort will help. Sincerely, Ed
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation
On Monday 01 September 2014 21:58:47 Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: The Fourth installment, testing and other oddments will be sent tomorrow. The implementation of __has_cpp_attribute is underway and will come in a few days as a Fifth installment (modulo bugs this should be all). I have it working in C++. I feel though that it would be welcome as it is in clang for all C-family languages. I intend to offer a __has_attribute for all C languages. The __has_cpp_attribute will just be for C++. Thiago, I did not mean to clobber your work. This has been baking for a while (last patches in June) and I just got back to it after a break with little useful attention to g++. Perhaps we can combine our work. I'll look over your patch. I know you want this to support Qt ;-) I think this effort will help. Hi Ed I don't care who does this, as long as it gets done. Though I would appreciate if the macros were added to the 4.9 branch, as the C++11 and 14 features are already there. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Re: [PATCH C++] - SD-6 Implementation Part 1 - __has_include.
On Sep 1, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net wrote: (I sort of wonder why this wasn't added to the actual preprocessor 20 years ago.) :-) So can you hack the system at template expansion time yet? :-) std::shell“/bin/sh -c …” maybe?
