On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:00 PM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulni...@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:42 PM Daniel Santos <daniel.san...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Nick,
> >
> > On 08/27/2018 03:09 PM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > >>> Let's give up __compiletime_assert_fallback(). This commit does not
> > >>> change the current behavior since it just rips off the useless code.
> > >> Clang is not the only target audience of
> > >> __compiletime_assert_fallback(). Instead of ripping out something that
> > >> may benefit builds with gcc 4.2 and earlier, why not override its
> > > Note that with commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc
> > > version to 4.6") that gcc < 4.6 is irrelevant.
> >
> > Ah, I guess I'm not keeping up, that's wonderful news! Considering that
> > I guess I would be OK with its removal, but I still think it would be
> > better if a similar mechanism to break the Clang build could be found.
>
> I'm consulting with our best language lawyers to see what combinations
> of _Static_assert and __builtin_constant_p would do the trick.
Linus,
Can this patch be merged in the meantime?
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
