在 2022/11/1 05:00, Martin Storsjö 写道:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137073 should fix it (but it isn't merged yet).Anyway, as for fixing the issue, we already have the situation where __MINGW_FORTIFY_VA_ARG is defined to 0 on Clang (since it doesn't implement __builtin_va_arg_pack()). The other instances that you're changing in this patch, outside of the __MINGW_FORTIFY_VA_ARG blocks, shouldn't be strictly necessary to change to fix the issue at hand - they're just changed for consistency?
Oh thanks, wasn't familiar with Clang. And yes, the others were changed as I thought they might be referenced (address taken) by someone in the future. As a permanent solution it would be good to replace `static inline` with `extern /GNU/ inline`.
So either we'd keep those as-is and just patch the cases within __MINGW_FORTIFY_VA_ARG, or we can add extra conditionals and two implementation alterantives of these functions too - e.g. something like this: .. Which alternative do you prefer?
Which function was it that caused errors in Clang?Just had a quick glance. The only function that isn't protected by `__MINGW_FORTIFY_VA_ARG` seems to be `vsnwprintf`, so probably it's fine to keep `__mingw_bos_ovr` for it. (and it would be the only reference?)
-- Best regards, LIU Hao
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
