From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C10713858C00 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:59:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org C10713858C00 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org C10713858C00 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1697839164; cv=none; b=ho6Vj3Oc8y+S19K6ZyGj0khvg1ub3v3lZEjKlaI1LMee4+H/1eFJEyeVGnrr6mQOEanEP791G7L1uXP2Bwh6Z5ljeZO+HLmTYZsRSO63pZ3i7nJ4ehCJnRfnMfpwc91KuQ7R+JJ2P7M7tPEjJDVkWzJOzMfSXyCHsDStxT5rOtQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1697839164; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kZC9G3lF8/LX2mFE4GfOK3i/Vk2tqJh6XpDfdWH9mhU=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=leZge+sGPqDB3Bs0Qbao6ZCEYI5hZcaD00B6q85+7DBon7HUNcMcEUKYHYIYh0wofF3LmCzcG9xq33RK+CCEh834A938KDpPEuAelxXhBup7rIR7va34+VWSl5Ww6P1K0c+go2ATKzF7o955jL9S8w9ni1l0sWQbLhT5Sjwxjp0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1697839163; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=LsrWW3XNA5FFIV3fDg6fh4ZM/WM+fAfiPofXpHU6qMQ=; b=K6IhcCodlsYdqNqfAfLg5BHZ3puD7YWqJG6RSCiBCmfVBEosX/R0Y7fFviJvoPbLjQ8PnK 32MOS6CK5gvaS0zPnLiwhGqV8ojrL7FeyF1jQ06IHwjfZLhv4EEKIFygcd26rfdXEX7VyR SxT3nJ788O7tpbV7IaKXx3JNIOuhYuo= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-577-y4cGOSzaMDyayeNGgWGTLg-1; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:59:22 -0400 X-MC-Unique: y4cGOSzaMDyayeNGgWGTLg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF9F888B76F for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:59:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.101]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C4B81C060AE; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:59:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 39KLxIXK3815373 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 20 Oct 2023 23:59:19 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 39KLxIPD3815372; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 23:59:18 +0200 Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 23:59:18 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Jason Merrill Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: Implement C++26 P2361R6 - Unevaluated strings [PR110342] Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <3be93b40-7810-4f10-be04-8b3d78d8e681@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3be93b40-7810-4f10-be04-8b3d78d8e681@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 04:12:48PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 8/24/23 09:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > The following patch implements C++26 unevaluated-string. > > As it seems to me just extra pedanticity, it is implemented only for > > -std=c++26 or -std=gnu++26 and later and only if -pedantic/-pedantic-errors. > > Hmm, I assumed it was accepted as a DR, but apparently not. In addition to > making things ill-formed, it clarifies that these strings are never > converted to the execution character set. I believe we implement it that way. cp_parser_unevaluated_string_literal (but several other spots as well) pass false to translate argument. > Do we support cross-compilation > to EBCDIC, which was the motivating context? Do you mean EBCDIC just as execution charset, or translation charset as well? There is some support for EBCDIC translation charset, but one needs iconv with UTF-EBCDIC support, which glibc doesn't support, so I have no way to actually verify it. Jakub