From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 66958 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2019 11:27:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 66949 invoked by uid 89); 27 Nov 2019 11:27:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-9.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=libsupc, HX-Languages-Length:1377 X-HELO: smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (HELO smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) (129.70.160.84) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 11:27:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008F942D; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:27:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (malfoy.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id OIzxuPnzHO7F; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:26:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p5085478D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.71.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E693542C; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:26:57 +0100 (CET) From: Rainer Orth To: Jonathan Wakely Cc: Joseph Myers , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Prevent all uses of DFP when unsupported (PR c/91985) References: <20191126121349.GK11522@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:18:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20191126121349.GK11522@redhat.com> (Jonathan Wakely's message of "Tue, 26 Nov 2019 12:13:49 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-11/txt/msg02495.txt.bz2 Hi Jonathan, > On 26/11/19 00:57 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: >>On Mon, 25 Nov 2019, Rainer Orth wrote: >> >>> and a few more, all DFP related. They used to be emitted by g++ for >>> __fundamental_type_info in libsupc++/fundamental_type_info.cc and lived >>> in the CXXABI_1.3.4 version. However, since Solaris *does* lack DFP >>> support, that's no longer the case. I'm uncertain how best to deal with >>> this, however. >> >>As I understand it, _GLIBCXX_USE_DECIMAL_FLOAT should already have been >>undefined for this target, and so std::decimal::decimal32 etc. should not >>have been usable (both the header not working without that define, and the >>mode attributes in the header being rejected by the front end when DFP is >>unsupported). I.e. such defines in libsupc++ would never have been usable >>on this target, so I think they are something it should be safe to remove >>from the ABI baseline. > > If it's actually impossible that any real program could have depended > on those symbols, then I agree. this is exactly what I've got no way of telling, that's why I was asking for guidance. Just removing the DFP symbols from the baselines works, of course. Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University