ldionne added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50341#1198339, @vsapsai wrote:
> What about defining a feature for unsupported configurations? I've tried
>
> if '__cpp_aligned_new' not in macros or \
> intMacroValue(macros['__cpp_aligned_new']) < 201606:
> self.config.available_features.add('libcpp-no-aligned-new')
>
>
> and `// UNSUPPORTED: libcpp-no-aligned-new`. Seems to be working but it's not
> sufficient. For example, clang-6 for old macOS versions would define
> `__cpp_aligned_new` but a test would fail. Still, we can use another feature,
> not necessarily macro-based. Though probably something like
> `libcpp-no-aligned-new` can replace `// UNSUPPORTED: c++98, c++03, c++11,
> c++14`.
I thought about something like this, but it would only be useful in a couple of
places, and I still don't understand why the tests are marked as unsupported on
some compilers at all. Also, there's already a feature called
`no-aligned-alloc`, which tests whether `-faligned-alloc` is supported, so we
should avoid confusing both.
Repository:
rCXX libc++
https://reviews.llvm.org/D50341
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
