From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7F5A384F00E; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 12:23:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org C7F5A384F00E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id cu12so2820111pfb.13; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 05:23:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679746998; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9wkSY9+80yyt3X1/jTCQMTkSz/kkat0+s/urrmY7C3M=; b=W3G4Za8ztQWNSK0lGmXJmv+jIDAHnR24j2X1vE/CEyJf5g2GDMydm1STRSYcyTWN4K vE7D5CdHLr7Jsdg1LT7xBeHIvTjRqIQ04TIRDJMpeqUbED5NPjUqqH2H7dIVn1fke+CO L16UPVrCUIAVgbZx8v1hpOqRPG/AnQv1B8K0oFzz/iX6Wqjbn2dj+iMGzus+JF7M/kfD tq+APPARhMzKJ20/ya5z9o/pN9zGFQHXD+symFpgWC/iH7fgv6Pr2ppp+QJu14CrQxbi /DCFigqr345MYzL66E+OahgdXDsLHyyFR8RVhUfYgq0goaYQV+VH3T0TYAHlodDeFwJF BAZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679746998; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=9wkSY9+80yyt3X1/jTCQMTkSz/kkat0+s/urrmY7C3M=; b=1vdektjsrSo+eectrxN5ou0JWONoamcNhzcAZukcGoLDTj9RjT2AfqtFp+9fmkPNtB ZRZo+y6FaZtzjewFbvT6TDXebvDfJfzZUm2RsYGRzXYZxxUZx1xVsHs+r5ZB+cZyrxT7 4yEqrPb3BMi4soCmpokh4Eh0oIMRgtCxphydAHI6+wgzuhDfQbTOTADIXMHdqYt0f9Os ODovOseLNMon4SoriqzuiceYDXCHuvVGgyhPyR14nWSWElcI2FSl04G7ssrdbgOPn301 5V8FbwVr21AJ8xi95HeU11qbf+GmH8u/SAbjmyTfFKi+Pq2PdTclPEufW0fl2V/H6JUe aXxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9fn7dqrTsrMYNOyk+CLyUVYb2G/kYvVb4Vb6jMpqo0z4KUx3NDe F4lEtRbd4FZrjCED+JzrHy8HWZU/zrd7SbGWaD0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350ZSLDViExTtfATBRjrb8vKAaKWFzM89p5fsyVJ0adeZ4RUuR9n4htpZLCoP9uUTuVbVWXMAolPHFkeV4pnZLno= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1881:b0:625:659e:65c with SMTP id x1-20020a056a00188100b00625659e065cmr3420785pfh.1.1679746998544; Sat, 25 Mar 2023 05:23:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Roy Jacobson Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2023 15:23:07 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GSoC] Conflicted Built-in Trait Name To: Ken Matsui Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "libstdc++" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000292ba605f7b893b0" X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP 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: --000000000000292ba605f7b893b0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Clang has been providing __is_void for a very long time now, and is definitely compatible with libstdc++. Does defining this builtin cause a problem? Might be that the lookup rules for builtins are different or something. https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#type-trait-primitives On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 at 15:08, Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on the GSoC project, "C++: Implement compiler built-in > traits for the standard library traits". > > Built-in trait naming simply adds two underscores (__) to the original > trait name. However, the same names are already in use for some > built-in traits, such as is_void, is_pointer, and is_signed. > > For example, __is_void is used in the following files: > > * gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tm/pr46567.C > * libstdc++-v3/include/bits/cpp_type_traits.h > > In this case, are we supposed to change the existing same name in the > code to something like ____is_void (four underscores)? Or is it better > to break the naming convention of built-in traits like > __is_void_builtin? > > Sincerely, > Ken Matsui > --000000000000292ba605f7b893b0--