From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8004 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2014 13:26:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7976 invoked by uid 89); 12 Nov 2014 13:26:31 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (HELO e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com) (195.75.94.106) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:31 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:28 -0000 Received: from d06dlp02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.20.14) by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.140) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:26 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by d06dlp02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B60219005E for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.217]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id sACDQPRp5308812 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:25 GMT Received: from d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id sAC8NhEc007516 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 03:23:43 -0500 Received: from bl3ahm9f.de.ibm.com (dyn-9-152-212-123.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.212.123]) by d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id sAC8Nhak007505 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 03:23:43 -0500 Received: from dvogt by bl3ahm9f.de.ibm.com with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XoXwG-0007Eg-EA; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:26:24 +0100 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:26:00 -0000 From: Dominik Vogt To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal for m*vc build issue (#138) Message-ID: <20141112132624.GA27444@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org Mail-Followup-To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org References: <20141112130755.GA24721@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <54635DAB.3080800@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54635DAB.3080800@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14111213-0041-0000-0000-000002181C9B X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 02:16:27PM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote: > > It might be good to > > specifically double check the detection of a compiler with complex > > support using macros. > > Looks good to me. ... but doesn't work with the gcc I use. I'll check what's going on. Maybe the no-complex case should generate a warning. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt IBM Germany