From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA0F5382D83C; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 11:54:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org DA0F5382D83C Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8889A88A4; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:54:48 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jYqIf4ctP0Wp; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:54:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p50855c8f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.92.143]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D49686D3; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:54:48 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE; s=20200306; t=1611316488; bh=FPNHZIZn/dNsitkiL2GnSn1aXXNEp/dTwJxo+U0R/gc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=e0HSiWhEqOCSELBg+fVYCg+xEZCIdW8n7fO4VVtb15sbH+7RjfHCmPIj6n84qZ6aE AaZsAZQzPG1zPOFosDwYKr2fgSTdeuMy4nHe+37prj7vf5+yHZm7SB7OE95nUIYnpo xyDL7wDSLWPtMK4ig+XmMbKoQyE6X3JAzq15ucml1hGtFi1yOkBvr8FChcGpdlFW/H /ykDuKBxjSV0oPqpGC28lXeWeMyvbPRgNX/+vGByHFsGkRHpjUG4ajqO9enkIgOaX/ I3t4XuvaJ2nD+fHx5/NfC6ReeOBI1grxapqp6X9VyT61iET1MGHgQIhb2vVB1cNjqp zLMi6rzN78n2g== From: Rainer Orth To: Jonathan Wakely Cc: "CHIGOT, CLEMENT" , libstdc++ , David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches , David Edelsohn Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: implement locale support for AIX References: <20210122112910.GI541588@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:54:47 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20210122112910.GI541588@redhat.com> (Jonathan Wakely's message of "Fri, 22 Jan 2021 11:29:10 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3789.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libstdc++ mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 11:54:52 -0000 Hi Jonathan, > On 22/01/21 12:04 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >>why? I've just double-checked the OpenGroup pages: all of the functions >>listed as XPG7 above were part of IEEE 1003.1-2008, just some of them >>have Technical Corrigenda applied. IIUC IEEE 1003.1-2017 is just a >>revision of the -2008 standard, not a new issue (XPG8 or something). > > Technically, the 2008 standard has been withdrawn and replaced by > 2017. Since the content is the same, it seems more correct to refer to > the current standard (even if Solaris only documents support for the > 2008 edition, if it also implements the corrigenda then it conforms to > 2017 even if it doesn't document that). I've found no macro that would distinguish P1003.1-2008 and -2017. It seems both are identified by _XOPEN_SOURCE=700 and _POSIX_C_SOURCE=200809L. > But as I said, a shorter, more memorable name like "xpg7" or just > "posix" might be preferable anyway. I'd strongly prefer xpg7 over posix: after all, xpg6 systems are still around (Solaris 11.3 being one of them, and I suspect older AIX versions as well). It's certainly much less of a mouthful than ieee_1003.1-2008 ;-) >>>> As for the BSD group, I suggest to have one representative configure >>>> test (for localeconv_l perhaps) and then use an appropriate name for the >>>> group as a whole. Again, this will most likely be an all-or-nothing >>>> thing. >>> >>> I'm not sure this is really all-or-nothing for these. Maybe strtof_l and cie >>> can be grouped by. But the 3 others are really different. Linux have >>> wcsftime_l >>> but not the others. AIX avec none. BSD have all. >> >>TBH, I don't care about Linux here: it will continue to use the gnu >>variant anyway. Besides, since the patch will have to work on targets >>without wcsftime_l and the other BSD functions, I don't see any harm in >>not using one non-standard one of them although it's present. > > I agree that GNU/Linux will continue to use the gnu model, but it can > still be usable as a useful extra test of the code's portablility, > since it implements everything in XPG7 (and more). We shouldn't spend > any effort doing linux-specific changes in this new model, since they > won't be used in practice. But if it works "out of the box" with no > tweaks, then that is useful for testing. Absolutely: the more different implementation we can throw at the code, the better for portability. Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University