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 [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4800F3858006 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 19:07:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 4800F3858006 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 4800F3858006 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1706728043; cv=none; b=DKkatt1O8u76dpvTImqMRGTByj7uFCY0qBp+URtKJFAU0jGFe6rdY7hmYcaY4t9jcfBVR/YbiZ/VdT6Jwsv2Gxm5liTBdSlN6cwD4gMmnIlEfJD7EX3+hxHVbGoKKqCfPosEB4A+6y/Q2S5lpeKo9UQgzHQOXyOXjHzghKKTaMU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1706728043; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wBCkbcnNso86ogpEG1PoclcSL8F9RU1P1A2OMtAvDPg=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=LFaYPfgWWX1NE/GVxMMFyeZma9DhpxtdecUlS/DlIBR1AlQuGyFjN5runVdUqoYfSTL3OrOzuQR7dD7McIDHCL4FlUmo24ov3Momcum32JXRefTd/aoSJrHz2v+o3yXddY5ikODLz/65HfJyOy800lsb2+oHf1b4k3pdPRpPC2U= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1706728040; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VOqsAkEHhagYly5SkpMF5bfbQPc1AMiaMPK6JbvXtlU=; b=GUSetMfP141zUxc/Zbhl8vNALHfIOJbSv1GQ8T400JS6dAUVjRqZQvs4t1jjtuEnSsNyty MwFa+7VowgzFJPWwUNDU5nVecFIaHeBdzK24YAcmJpTdM6fyGIj3OqV6LBUNFsQpFdYfBT 2veaIvmxeJHv7U/ULank0HlKuRd/Se8= Received: from mail-qv1-f72.google.com (mail-qv1-f72.google.com [209.85.219.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-586-C4KnWwU7PA-pPAXKRsPwyQ-1; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:07:19 -0500 X-MC-Unique: C4KnWwU7PA-pPAXKRsPwyQ-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-68c4e69e121so1915356d6.2 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:07:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706728038; x=1707332838; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=VOqsAkEHhagYly5SkpMF5bfbQPc1AMiaMPK6JbvXtlU=; b=AgyJp6D2NdvUu5dkl7c1ukJo2Ox5j+/TjcML2dAR8bXEYWspKP4nezFNHBjdXrMj8m 1pDXfHFzLyixgf4CN8eKH3/jOJaBmKi9xD+J/BKd2TbnSPoMLku8ISVVDTKBdCvnhEa/ oU1LewkATMxf8fG+A40MNrGaSqXHr/b5g0I1s83KtUd5duQ51/WK9/uXtdixrLTMjh5Q WDNJIWsWvn9io17MxR3YGmDR/qN5uQpwge1TGPy0f8Hr8H2RPjn6E8MKQbXHhWZBFzmi f57o6ZPoiTW1TyhOoMLddCIyBNeHM8igKkiN8G44K7zBMjyOG64w1EtYBm+Tut40K/Ly JZRw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw2pNWW8WogPqww9F2D6q5YCbinvuK2bR6vn/jUMjuIYOtQZjJa yS2P5zjKGT4dlzWh+1MnuTntNy+N0nSZ6pRc2Q8Z8WPog67H+utHsVBa+uqpEL4FW8mIijQ0705 Ony679F+PFF+CqCbUWNx9T0bgV07dsuQDNaQnybl9yM9XupVFLRYmE4o= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8bc1:0:b0:68c:475d:5394 with SMTP id a1-20020a0c8bc1000000b0068c475d5394mr149726qvc.27.1706728038524; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:07:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHbOTDheB3rUhO04kS99BFJdjKx/i42i1oUMv4PIxKmyhtvokytW0Lha9kjJsQPg4UmODoYjg== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8bc1:0:b0:68c:475d:5394 with SMTP id a1-20020a0c8bc1000000b0068c475d5394mr149709qvc.27.1706728038223; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from redhat.com (2603-7000-9500-34a5-0000-0000-0000-1db4.res6.spectrum.com. [2603:7000:9500:34a5::1db4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id kr17-20020a0562142b9100b0068c4aabcdb6sm3690473qvb.29.2024.01.31.11.07.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:07:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:07:16 -0500 From: Marek Polacek To: Jason Merrill Cc: Richard Biener , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] c++: add deprecation notice for -fconcepts-ts Message-ID: References: <20240130231841.418861-1-polacek@redhat.com> <922c8f45-fbf4-4491-9b4f-1e75076848a0@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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 Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 02:00:18PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 1/31/24 10:55, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 08:53:00AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > On 1/31/24 03:40, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:19 AM Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? > > > > > > > > > > -- >8 -- > > > > > We plan to deprecate -fconcepts-ts in GCC 15 and remove the flag_concepts_ts > > > > > code. This note is an admonishing reminder to convert the Concepts TS > > > > > code to C++20 Concepts. > > > > > > > > What does "deprecated in GCC 15" mean? Given you output the notice with > > > > GCC 14 it would be better to state when it's going to be removed - > > > > it's effectively > > > > "deprecated" right now then? Or will it continue to "work" forever > > > > until it bitrots? > > > > Sorry for the wrong choice of words. I meant deprecated now, removed later. > > > Agreed, it's deprecated now. We talked about it having no effect in GCC 15; > > > the message could say that. Or we could leave it vague and just say it's > > > deprecated. > > > > > > Please also update invoke.texi. > > > > Like this? > > Hmm, I'm not sure whether we want to actually remove the option or just the > support, as with -fcilkplus. I was assuming the latter, in which case the > patch could use some further rewording, but perhaps in the case of > extensions like this (and Cilk+) it makes sense to actually remove the > option. Any other opinions? I assumed that we'd turn fconcepts-ts into "Ignore", since we've kept even options like fdeduce-init-list or ffor-scope around. I suppose in GCC 15 it should be marked as WarnRemoved, but fcilkplus isn't WarnRemoved, so I'm not sure. Should I have said "ignored in GCC 15"? > > -- >8 -- > > We plan to remove -fconcepts-ts in GCC 15 and thus remove the flag_concepts_ts > > code. This note is an admonishing reminder to convert the Concepts TS > > code to C++20 Concepts. > > > > gcc/c-family/ChangeLog: > > > > * c-opts.cc (c_common_post_options): Add an inform saying that > > -fconcepts-ts is deprecated and will be removed in GCC 15. > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > * doc/invoke.texi: Mention that -fconcepts-ts was deprecated in GCC 14. > > --- > > gcc/c-family/c-opts.cc | 5 +++++ > > gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4 +++- > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-opts.cc b/gcc/c-family/c-opts.cc > > index b38a1225ac4..b845aff2226 100644 > > --- a/gcc/c-family/c-opts.cc > > +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-opts.cc > > @@ -1139,6 +1139,11 @@ c_common_post_options (const char **pfilename) > > if (cxx_dialect >= cxx20 || flag_concepts_ts) > > flag_concepts = 1; > > + /* -fconcepts-ts will be removed in GCC 15. */ > > + if (flag_concepts_ts) > > + inform (input_location, "%<-fconcepts-ts%> is deprecated and will be " > > + "removed in GCC 15; please convert your code to C++20 concepts"); > > + > > /* -fimmediate-escalation has no effect when immediate functions are not > > supported. */ > > if (flag_immediate_escalation && cxx_dialect < cxx20) > > diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > > index eb931b984e8..ca2c0e90452 100644 > > --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > > +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > > @@ -3204,7 +3204,9 @@ the language standard, so @option{-fconcepts} defaults to on. > > Some constructs that were allowed by the earlier C++ Extensions for > > Concepts Technical Specification, ISO 19217 (2015), but didn't make it > > into the standard, can additionally be enabled by > > -@option{-fconcepts-ts}. > > +@option{-fconcepts-ts}. The option @option{-fconcepts-ts} was deprecated > > +in GCC 14 and may be removed in GCC 15; users are expected to convert > > +their code to C++20 concepts. > > @opindex fconstexpr-depth > > @item -fconstexpr-depth=@var{n} > > > > base-commit: f7935beef7b02fbba0adf33fb2ba5c0a27d7e9ff > Marek