From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 993F53858C41; Thu, 25 Apr 2024 16:26:14 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 993F53858C41 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1714062374; bh=t/c3HCViMiDUh4WnoSQbsm2JmIovfJbIb/RtB/xwEus=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lpFrEqKFa3/lDW3Z8MVDQFM18cTxc5YkFHbSH6b6WlNpt1O7RpZxZ9l841AQ6xfw0 39QBAI6F+8awIukKxkkvyhgwbBkGBddbDLDaKqngOiBlJgknZVsrR1KBplaRAx4dqG nL1HU87M2cl8QTrVul1aehsX258nhWAcxRKbXuXI= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/94753] -undef, c++20 and feature-test macros Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 16:26:14 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94753 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- I will change the testcase's comment to be: ``` For C++11+ __cpp_constexpr and __cpp_static_assert GCC define these even wi= th -undef. ``` The feature macros as mentioned by Jonathan, we want them defined almost everywhere including in older versions of C++, my patch still implements th= at. The comment in the testcase might be confusing since feature macros were no= t in C++11 but we should still define them for C++11.=