On Sun, 17 Nov 2013, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:12:07PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:--- a/configure +++ b/configure @@ -963,6 +963,16 @@ check_builtin(){ +check_compile_assert(){ + log check_compile_assert "$@" + name=$1 + headers=$2 + condition=$3 + shift 3 + disable "$name" + check_code cc "$headers" "char c[!!($condition) - 1]" "$@" && enable "$name" +} + @@ -3393,6 +3404,9 @@ if enabled_all ccc glibc; then +check_compile_assert flt_lim "float.h limits.h" "DBL_MAX == (double)DBL_MAX" || + add_cppflags '-I\$(SRC_PATH)/compat/limits' +I'm not terribly fond of the name as I don't see any assertion being invoked, nor do I think this test will be very reusable.
Without commenting on the rest of this, this _IS_ a compile time assert - it's a pretty generic pattern. It doesn't need to invoke any assert by itself, but if the condition isn't true, the compiler will refuse to compile the snippet. See e.g. this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/807244/c-compiler-asserts-how-to-implement
Whether we'll need this for other things as well or not, I'm not sure. // Martin _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
