https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64883
--- Comment #53 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #52) > I'm not even sure we should fixinclude the darwin headers. If darwin wants > to ship headers that prevent users from defining the non-reserved attribute > names as macros, that's darwin's business. well, the point was that we can file a bug/radar against current system headers using things outside the implementation space, but that won't fix things retrospectively. However, inclined to think this is a low priority and can be fixed well enough for the earlier systems by the patch(es) I already have - just need a retest.
