From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7842 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2011 17:05:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 7828 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2011 17:05:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_JS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO sourceware.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 17:05:30 +0000 From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com Subject: [Bug libc/10110] Separate __STDC_* predefines from features.h X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: libc X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: SUSPENDED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: drepper.fsp at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 17:05:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10110 --- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-04 14:41:34 UTC --- Subject: Re: Separate __STDC_* predefines from features.h On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, pasky at suse dot cz wrote: > So this should be now marked as SUSPENDED, waiting for the gcc changes, right? No, the GCC changes are waiting on glibc maintainer feedback - feedback on whether, given what I said, a libc change using a separate header only for __STDC_ISO_10646__ would be acceptable, or whether it will be required for GCC to extract the __STDC_ISO_10646__ value using fixincludes. The basic GCC mechanism is needed in any case, but glibc maintainer feedback is awaited to determine what the next pair of patches should look like. --- Comment #6 from Joseph Myers 2011-01-08 17:05:10 UTC --- Similar use cases for the glibc change and compiler feature also apply for some optional C1X predefines (these are quite like the use case for DFP implementation). * Supposing glibc does not initially when supporting C1X implement the optional (which duplicates facilities already in POSIX, but with different interfaces), __STDC_NO_THREADS__ should be predefined (for the whole translation unit), but users should still be able to use an add-on or third-party implementation of these functions which should be able to cause this macro to be undefined (for the whole translation unit) when the -I option pointing to its headers is passed. And hardcoding knowledge in GCC that a particular library feature is unsupported seems like a bad idea since it may not always be unsupported. * The optional Annex K (formerly TR 24731-1) will presumably also not be implemented in glibc (in general those functions are of very dubious design and utility), but again it should be possible for an add-on or separate implementation to provide implementation of the functions and wrapper headers, and to cause __STDC_LIB_EXT1__ to be defined when the appropriate -I option is passed. -- Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.