From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 019933858414; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:50:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 019933858414
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1705308621;
	bh=bSbQ2kMvPtvnCm/ou62O9+xhD5Rg7ZP8aAY53ZCF3r8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=TOoJVK4NWkdNOwSG/cy487aq2VuKkUV/Qfc14EH1yF8D13lVLV3281kI9k+Nd7J5S
	 1x46j9m0tLvl4ycs03tv6kp8ZX+fR0US5EoSSiT1BLMvoteP1qG2yYUocUeazPkFJI
	 AzpH1D3r/eh2A9XdD3tm+q9CnarGI5IyQ8LYXYSE=
From: "pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/113376] Confusing notes when using C++17 parallel
 algorithms
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:50:20 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113376-4-ifFWiZWcV9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113376-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113376-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113376

--- Comment #1 from Pilar Latiesa <pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Pilar Latiesa from comment #0)
> I don't understand why all these functions are even instantiated as they
> appear to be related to the vectorization of other algorithms.

Pragma messages are shown irrespectively of whether the function is
instantiated.

> i.e. is checking defined(_PSTL_USAGE_WARNINGS) instead of just
> _PSTL_USAGE_WARNINGS. This logic doesn't seem right.

This change was made as part of r14-2109-g3162ca09dbdc2e:

- #if _PSTL_USAGE_WARNINGS
+ #if defined(_PSTL_USAGE_WARNINGS)

I don=E2=80=99t think this change is correct.=