Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com writes:
While I was going over the C++11 status page, I noticed that quick_exit is
implemented by glibc, it just needed to be added to the libstdc++ cstdlib
header.
The test fails on Solaris 9:
FAIL: 18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc (test for excess errors)
Hi Rainer,
On 02/14/2013 04:45 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com writes:
While I was going over the C++11 status page, I noticed that quick_exit is
implemented by glibc, it just needed to be added to the libstdc++ cstdlib
header.
The test fails on Solaris 9:
FAIL:
... or the below, just in case an interesting system provides the
*quick_exit functions but doesn't define _GLIBCXX_USE_C99.
Paolo.
///
Index: testsuite/18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc
===
---
On 02/14/2013 02:16 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
... or the below, just in case an interesting system provides the
*quick_exit functions but doesn't define _GLIBCXX_USE_C99.
It seems rather unlikely that the system would provide some C11
functions without the corresponding C99 ones. I'm just
On 02/12/2013 07:55 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Again, the current status is in a sense good because when the
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_AT_QUICK_EXIT and _GLIBCXX_HAVE_QUICK_EXIT are defined,
thus the system has the functions in its c library, including cstdlib
makes available the functions in namespace std
Hi,
On 02/13/2013 03:38 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 02/12/2013 07:55 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Again, the current status is in a sense good because when the
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_AT_QUICK_EXIT and _GLIBCXX_HAVE_QUICK_EXIT are defined,
thus the system has the functions in its c library, including
The test fails on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with
FAIL: 18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/opt/gcc/work/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc:36:3:
error: 'at_quick_exit' is not a member of 'std'
On 02/12/2013 12:26 PM, domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
The test fails on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with
FAIL: 18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/opt/gcc/work/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc:36:3:
error: 'at_quick_exit' is not a member
On 02/12/2013 12:32 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 02/12/2013 12:26 PM, domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
The test fails on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with
FAIL: 18_support/quick_exit/quick_exit.cc (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
IIRC I have already asked a similar question about atan2, erf, ...
which don't appear in the std namespace on darwin.
Dominique
On 02/12/2013 12:40 PM, domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
IIRC I have already asked a similar question about atan2, erf, ...
which don't appear in the std namespace on darwin.
You should check whether darwin by chance uses by default c_std instead
of c_global. The former doesn't provide C++11
But the last time I checked, modern darwin defined
_GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1, no problems.
AFAICT this is true, but I think darwin10 was released in 2011
so I doubt it has any support for c++11.
Anyway, about the cstdlib issue the below makes available the new
functions in c_std/cstdlib
On 02/12/2013 01:47 PM, domi...@lps.ens.fr wrote:
But the last time I checked, modern darwin defined
_GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1, no problems.
AFAICT this is true, but I think darwin10 was released in 2011
so I doubt it has any support for c++11.
Anyway, about the cstdlib issue the below makes
While I was going over the C++11 status page, I noticed that quick_exit
is implemented by glibc, it just needed to be added to the libstdc++
cstdlib header.
Does this configury/feature macro handling look right? Is this enough
testcase? Is this small/safe enough to go in for 4.8?
commit
Does this configury/feature macro handling look right?
yes.
Is this enough testcase?
yes.
Is this small/safe enough to go in for 4.8?
yes.
commit 884a2a7815a95bade9d23f01b4c64a16808c7f05
Author: Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com
Date: Mon Feb 11 11:23:30 2013 -0500
*
Hi,
On 02/11/2013 06:33 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
While I was going over the C++11 status page, I noticed that
quick_exit is implemented by glibc, it just needed to be added to the
libstdc++ cstdlib header.
Does this configury/feature macro handling look right? Is this enough
testcase? Is
.. also, I think we should have #if __cplusplus = 201103L protecting
these functions too, exactly like all the other C++11 bits. Eg, I don't
think we should unconditionally, ie in C++03 mode too, declare
at_quick_exit and quick_exit in namespace std.
I can tweak things for the two issues I
.. also, I think we should have #if __cplusplus = 201103L protecting
these functions too, exactly like all the other C++11 bits. Eg, I
don't think we should unconditionally, ie in C++03 mode too, declare
at_quick_exit and quick_exit in namespace std.
Yeah.
I can tweak things for the two
On 02/11/2013 07:54 PM, Benjamin De Kosnik wrote:
I can tweak things for the two issues I noticed.
Thanks.
It seems like this is still 4.8 material to me.
Great. I'll take care of that later today. I'm also going to make sure
the new testcase doesn't spuriously fail if the functions aren't
... this is what I committed.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-02-11 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
* include/c_std/cstdlib (at_quick_exit, quick_exit): Do not declare.
* include/c_global/cstdlib (at_quick_exit, quick_exit): Declare only
in C++11 mode
20 matches
Mail list logo
