[valgrind] [Bug 390524] use of 0b prefix for binary constants
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=390524 Ivo Raisr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||iv...@ivosh.net Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Ivo Raisr --- Support for binary constants has been around since gcc 4.3.0 (since 2008, 10 years ago). Also clang supports this notation. I don't see any reason why we need to prefer compatibility with ancient compilers over readability and maintainability. I think your case is a singular one; majority of LTS distros have moved off of such ancient gcc versions long time ago. You can't expect recent version of Valgrind work with an ancient version of the compiler; neither is the case of other toolchain components. There are going to be more and more cases of Valgrind using compiler features available only to reasonably recent compilers. You could get away for now with a simple patch, changing the binary constants into hexadecimal ones, for example. But with the evolution bringing new changes, you could end up with a huge patchset eventually. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
[valgrind] [Bug 390524] use of 0b prefix for binary constants
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=390524 Ivo Raisr changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jsew...@acm.org |iv...@ivosh.net -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
[valgrind] [Bug 390524] use of 0b prefix for binary constants
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=390524 --- Comment #2 from Jeff Frontz --- Note -- the target application is in a regulated industry and the development environment has all been validated (i.e., changing-up to a later version of gcc isn't in the cards for quite a while). Would it be at least possible to add some sort of config (in combination with a variably defined #define for the constant)? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
[valgrind] [Bug 390524] use of 0b prefix for binary constants
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=390524 --- Comment #1 from Jeff Frontz --- Converting the constant to a simple 0x10 seems to make everything better (at least as far as compilation and running on x86 linux). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
