Hi Paolo,
>> I'm pretty sure this is the case for Solaris. The other changes we've
>> made to support __cplusplus 199711L were no-ops without the last one to
>> change __cplusplus from 1 to the C++ 98 value. So, redefining
>> __cplusplus to 1 should return us back to the old status.
>
> I see, then I think the patch is Ok. Since you are so well positioned to test
> on Solaris machines, I would recommend running the library testsuite with
> -D__cplusplus=1 added to CXXFLAGS, as a final check.
I've just done that on i386-pc-solaris2.11, but had to use -U__cplusplus
-D__cplusplus=1 to avoid the redefinition warning. This way, I get only
a single regression:
-PASS: abi/header_cxxabi.c (test for excess errors)
+FAIL: abi/header_cxxabi.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: abi/header_cxxabi.c (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/var/gcc/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/i386-pc-solaris2.11/libstdc++-v3/include/i386-pc-solaris2.11/bits/c++config.h:167:1:
error: unknown type name 'namespace'
/var/gcc/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/i386-pc-solaris2.11/libstdc++-v3/include/i386-pc-solaris2.11/bits/c++config.h:168:1:
error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '{' token
which is pretty obvious given that this test is supposed to be compiled
as C :-)
I guess the patch is ok now?
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
