Yep. We should figure out how best to add tests for libc++'s module map in the near future, but this LGTM for now. On 23 Sep 2014 16:12, "Nico Weber" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> when using modules in c++98, libc++ currently fails to build: >>> >>> While building module 'std' imported from src/disk_interface.h:18: >>> In file included from <module-includes>:3: >>> /Users/thakis/src/chrome/src/third_party/llvm-build/Release+Asserts/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:539:2: >>> error: <atomic> is not implemented >>> #error <atomic> is not implemented >>> ^ >>> In file included from src/disk_interface.cc:15: >>> src/disk_interface.h:18:10: fatal error: could not build module 'std' >>> #include <map> >>> ~~~~~~~~^ >>> >>> The attached patch fixes this by making atomic depend on cxx_atomics. >>> Fixes PR21002. >>> >> >> Doesn't this just make the atomic submodule always unavailable? We don't >> have a cxx_atomics feature, as far as I can see. And cxx_atomic (the >> corresponding __has_feature flag) wouldn't work either: module features are >> not the same as __has_feature features (see the relevant documentation >> here: http://clang.llvm.org/docs/Modules.html#requires-declaration). >> cplusplus11 is the best check we have for this. >> > > Aw, bummer. Is the patch ok with s/cxx_atomics/cplusplus11/? >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
