On 21/01/19 14:40 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:08:15PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Here is an updated patch, that in addition to that makes 9 URLs as we now
have #cxx in gcc-9/changes.html and adds missing P0941R2 entry that clang
table has. For that one I'm not 100% sure what to say, I've copied all the
macros from http://wg21.link/p0941r2 into two source files (attached below),
one for core language features, another one for library and tested those
with -std=c++2a with current trunk. Compared to what the paper lists, we
have __has_cpp_attribute (carries_dependency) 0, __cpp_guaranteed_copy_elision
and __cpp_nontype_template_parameter_auto not defined. Is that what we
want? On the library side, __cpp_lib_any, __cpp_lib_execution,
__cpp_lib_hardware_interference_size, __cpp_lib_null_iterators,
__cpp_lib_parallel_algorithm, __cpp_lib_raw_memory_algorithms,
__cpp_lib_to_chars, __cpp_lib_uncaught_exceptions, __cpp_lib_variant
macros aren't defined (at least not in <version>) and
__cpp_lib_optional, __cpp_lib_shared_ptr_arrays, __cpp_lib_string_view
have smaller values than those in the P0941R2.
Is that the desirable state given current C++2A implementation status?
Ok for wwwdocs (or do you suggest something different for the P0941R2
imlementation status)?
I'd like to ping this patch.
For P0941R2 I think we can just say it's supported. For the library
docs I said we support it since GCC 5.1 because that's when we started
defining feature test macros. The point of the paper is to define
macros for the features that are supported, and we've been doing that
for years. If a macro is missing, it's because we don't support the
feature yet, and that's a correct implementation of the macro!
