Tested x86_64-linux. Pushed to trunk. I'll check, but I think should be backported to gcc-13 too.
-- >8 -- As noted in the PR, we support both features required for the 202110L value, so we should define it with that value. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: PR libstdc++/111826 * include/bits/version.def (format): Update value. * include/bits/version.h: Regenerate. * testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc: --- libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.def | 4 +- libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.h | 128 +++++++++--------- .../testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc | 4 +- 3 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-) diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.def b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.def index 140777832ed..38b73ec9b5d 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.def +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/version.def @@ -1160,14 +1160,12 @@ ftms = { // TODO: #define __cpp_lib_format_ranges 202207L name = format; values = { - v = 202106; + v = 202110; cxxmin = 20; hosted = yes; }; }; -// #undef __glibcxx_chrono -// #define __glibcxx_chrono 201907L // FIXME: #define __glibcxx_execution 201902L ftms = { diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc index dacc276e03c..9328dec8875 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/std/format/functions/format.cc @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ #ifndef __cpp_lib_format # error "Feature test macro for std::format is missing in <format>" -#elif __cpp_lib_format < 202106L +#elif __cpp_lib_format < 202110L # error "Feature test macro for std::format has wrong value in <format>" #endif @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ #include <version> #ifndef __cpp_lib_format # error "Feature test macro for std::format is missing in <version>" -#elif __cpp_lib_format < 202106L +#elif __cpp_lib_format < 202110L # error "Feature test macro for std::format has wrong value in <version>" #endif -- 2.43.0