I do work on windows 95 with mingw-w64. C++17 filesystem breaks dynamic linking 
of Libstdc++ for me which sucks.
So stop representing other people and just admit C++ standard did a horrible 
job and that is why Linus Torvalds hates it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9rHAt1KMq0

If you do believe C++ standard is “so important.” Then why array, 
std::addressof are not freestanding?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DorYSHu4Sjk

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows

From: Jacek Caban<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 15:52
To: LIU Hao<mailto:[email protected]>; 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>;
 JonY<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Adding a new thread model to GCC

On 11/14/22 09:57, LIU Hao wrote:
> 在 2022/10/25 04:50, Jacek Caban 写道:
>>
>> This also may be supported in existing threading models. Overflow is
>> trivial to fix by waiting in a loop. (There are other reasons why OS
>> support for absolute timeout is slightly better, but the price of
>> this design decision makes it questionable. I plan to elaborate more
>> on that on mingw ML, but I need to find time to do a bit of research
>> first).
>>
>>
>
> What's the status of your 'a bit of research'? This looks like
> procrastination to me.


I was short on spare time lately, my apologies. I was planning to learn
your code to have more insightful comments, but it requires non-trivial
amount of time that I couldn't allocate. Anyway, I don't think there is
any procrastination, your threading model is merged after all.


Meantime, Eric updated his patches on gcc-patches. I wonder what's the
next step for them? Jon?


> Do you (and some others) consider standard conformance not-a-thing; or
> should we maintain such bug-to-bug compatibility, letting users to
> solve such issues themselves?


I think that when there is a real bug, we should fix it. As for standard
themselves, I think that C/C++ standards are important. Praising
POSIX-alike standards for mingw-w64, who's CRT is a wrapper around
Windows system CRT, seems a bit misplaced for me. Using it makes sense
sometimes, but I don't think it should be a goal on its own. For full
POSIX compatibility, one needs something like Cygwin, MSYS or WSL2 anyway.


Unless it's not clear, I appreciate your efforts to fix things. I just
don't agree that some (admittedly important) implementation details are
the best way to fix them.


Thanks,

Jacek



_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public


_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to