public inbox for libstdc++-cvs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Wakely <redi@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++-cvs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [gcc r14-9455] libstdc++: Document that _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS might be removed in future
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 23:51:51 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240313235151.E85413858D33@sourceware.org> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d6490157b3e7ec45a024d1a2acc96e53934dbb0e

commit r14-9455-gd6490157b3e7ec45a024d1a2acc96e53934dbb0e
Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu Mar 7 12:00:55 2024 +0000

    libstdc++: Document that _GLIBCXX_CONCEPT_CHECKS might be removed in future
    
    The macro-based concept checks are unmaintained and do not support C++11
    or later, so reject valid code. If nobody plans to update them we should
    consider removing them. Alternatively, we could ignore the macro for
    C++11 and later, so they have no effect and don't reject valid code.
    
    libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
    
            * doc/xml/manual/debug.xml: Document that concept checking might
            be removed in future.
            * doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml: Likewise.

Diff:
---
 libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml      |  2 ++
 libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml | 18 ++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml
index 42d4d32aa29..7f6d0876fc6 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/debug.xml
@@ -351,6 +351,8 @@
 
   <para> The <link linkend="manual.ext.compile_checks">Compile-Time
   Checks</link> extension has compile-time checks for many algorithms.
+  These checks were designed for C++98 and have not been updated to work
+  with C++11 and later standards. They might be removed at a future date.
   </para>
 </section>
 
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml
index d4fe2f509d4..490a50cc331 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/doc/xml/manual/extensions.xml
@@ -77,8 +77,7 @@ extensions, be aware of two things:
       object file.  The checks are also cleaner and easier to read and
       understand.
    </para>
-   <para>They are off by default for all versions of GCC from 3.0 to 3.4 (the
-      latest release at the time of writing).
+   <para>They are off by default for all GCC 3.0 and all later versions.
       They can be enabled at configure time with
       <link linkend="manual.intro.setup.configure"><literal>--enable-concept-checks</literal></link>.
       You can enable them on a per-translation-unit basis with
@@ -89,10 +88,17 @@ extensions, be aware of two things:
    </para>
 
    <para>Please note that the concept checks only validate the requirements
-   of the old C++03 standard. C++11 was expected to have first-class
-   support for template parameter constraints based on concepts in the core
-   language. This would have obviated the need for the library-simulated concept
-   checking described above, but was not part of C++11.
+   of the old C++03 standard and reject some valid code that meets the relaxed
+   requirements of C++11 and later standards.
+   C++11 was expected to have first-class support for template parameter
+   constraints based on concepts in the core language.
+   This would have obviated the need for the library-simulated concept checking
+   described above, but was not part of C++11.
+   C++20 adds a different model of concepts, which is now used to constrain
+   some new parts of the C++20 library, e.g. the
+   <filename>&lt;ranges&gt;</filename> header and the new overloads in the
+   <filename>&lt;algorithm&gt;</filename> header for working with ranges.
+   The old library-simulated concept checks might be removed at a future date.
    </para>
 
 </chapter>

                 reply	other threads:[~2024-03-13 23:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20240313235151.E85413858D33@sourceware.org \
    --to=redi@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=libstdc++-cvs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).