thakis added a comment. In D17444#1393339 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D17444#1393339>, @rnk wrote:
> In D17444#1392823 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D17444#1392823>, @thakis wrote: > > > Instead of this patch we could have an assert.h wrapper in lib/Headers that > > defines static_assert to _Static_assert in ms mode for C files, and I > > suppose that's a cleaner fix. But I hope it's not controversial that we > > should try and support standard C programs? > > > I'd prefer it if we didn't shadow more MSVC CRT headers like assert.h. Users > have a long history of holding the compiler wrong, losing these > interpositions, and having things not work. If we could just work out the > box, users will have less problems, we'll have fewer bug reports, etc, etc. I > still think we should follow MSVC and add this is a plain old C++ extension > to C under -fms-extensions. Given that we already have interposition headers and users already have to hold the compiler right, does it matter if we have one more interposing header? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D17444/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D17444 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
