> Except to the extent which they're not, which is clear from the fact that I was able to recognize that as clang's header.
I don't object to marking it as clang-derived. I can also copy the copyright notice. > Why should the Tiny _C_ Compiler's headers be compatible with c++? Because this is the direction which will most certainly be reflected in the future standards, in C++ for sure. If it's not difficult to keep it compatible, I don't see why it should not be compatible. I cannot predict how and why this header can be re-used, though. ср, 27 янв. 2021 г., 01:07 Elijah Stone <elro...@elronnd.net>: > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, Dmitry Selyutin wrote: > > > They all look mostly the same: a bunch of defines, typedefs and compiler > > intrinsics or extensions. > > Except to the extent which they're not, which is clear from the fact that > I was able to recognize that as clang's header. > > > Also, gcc's stdatomic.h is totally incompatible with C++, which is per > > se a good reason to avoid it. > > Why should the Tiny _C_ Compiler's headers be compatible with c++? > > -E >
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
