Ping?
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The attached patch implements your suggestion (without the max). I >> verified that this passes on x86 os x and arm android. >> >> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Marshall Clow <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On May 28, 2014, at 4:36 AM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > Hi, >>>> > >>>> > On arm, the maxium alignment is 8. The attached patch tweaks >>>> meta.trans.other/aligned_storage.pass.cpp so that it passes on arm. (The >>>> test currently assumes that alignment goes up to at least 16.) >>>> >>>> Nico — >>>> >>>> I’m a bit leery of >>>> + static_assert(std::alignment_of<T1>::value == alignof(T1), >>>> ""); >>>> b/c I’m not sure that it tests what we want to test here. >>>> >>>> Is there some way that we can use max_align_t in this test? >>>> >>>> Maybe something like (untested code): >>>> static_assert ( std::alignment_of<T1>::value == std::max(16, >>>> alignof(std::max_align_t)); >>>> >>> >>> Why the max? On arm, alignof(max_align_t) is 8 (just like alignof(T1)), >>> so max(16, alignof(max_aling_t)) is 16, while std::alignment_of<T1>::value >>> is 8. >>> >>> static_assert(std::alignment_of<T1>::value == >>> alignof(std::max_align_t), ""); >>> >>> does work though, if you like that better. Should I just >>> s/alignof(T1)/alignof(std::max_align_t)/ in my patch? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> — Marshall >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
