Having the ability to detect the variant seems useful. The ABI tweaks that ARM uses does become visible to the ABI support library (e.g. __cxa_guard_*). Having the ability to detect the variant would permit additional flexibility and permit that the runtime validate that the variant matches.
I don't have a suggestion on how to represent the variant information however. On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:54 PM Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it makes sense to have semi-standard macros for this, and while > these aren't standard features I think SD-6 could be an OK home for them. > > Do you anticipate needing any way to detect abi variants (eg, ARM ABI is > itanium with tweaks)? > > I think some kind of version could be useful for both macros, but that > could be added later. > > On 6 Jan 2017 5:45 pm, "Saleem Abdulrasool" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I was wondering if it would be possible to add a macro to identify the > underlying ABI that the C++ runtime is using? Although itanium is the more > popular choice, there are alternative ABIs such as the one which Microsoft > uses. I would propose something like the following: > > __cpp_abi_itanium > __cpp_abi_microsoft > > They would be defined to 1 based on which is being used. This would allow > the implementation to change the behavior based on the ABI being used. > > Thanks! > > -- > Saleem Abdulrasool > compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Features mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
