On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:08:50AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be * 100 and > 405 ? I mean, we already had GCC
> > 2.95, 2.96, 2.97 and 20 + 95 is > 45...
> This idiom is the one already used in tracebak.c for example. Would that
> really matter in practice?
It is a bad idiom, given that we already had >= 10 __GNUC_MINOR__ and it
is possible we'll have 4.10 as well.
E.g. __GNUC_PREREQ macro in glibc shifts left major by 16, but even
multiplying by 100 instead of 10 is better.