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 04BEE38708C4; Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:19:14 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 04BEE38708C4
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:19:14 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
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-98861-4-zo4BkF5YxL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-98861-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-98861-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:19:15 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98861

--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> > > That does not work in the real-world since your libstdc++'s freestand=
ing
> > > header never works correctly, (you get compilation errors).
> >=20
> > Try reporting a bug about *that* next time (except don't, I don't want =
any
> > more stupidity from you).
>=20
> Let me be more clear.


That would be a welcome change from your usual nonsense.

> 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> You do not have std::addressof(). you do not have std::array.) However, y=
ou
> have an exception handling support.

But no dependency on stdio.


> 2. What's the point of reporting a bug when building libstdc++ with GNU

So it can be fixed, duh.

> newlib just works much better and you have an entire hosted toolchain that
> will not break compilation? The only problem is that you never enable EH.
> I did report bugs before. However, it was not fixed. I am not going to try
> it again tbh since newlib works just fine.

Great. So build with --disable-libstdcxx-verbose as well and stop complaini=
ng
about a feature that other people find useful.

Maybe we should make that the default for --with-newlib builds. That might =
be a
useful improvement. More useful than your usual hyperbole and timewasting
anyway.=