On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Pascal Stumpf <pascal.stu...@cubes.de> wrote: > On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:55:04 +0100 (CET), Mark Kettenis wrote: >> > Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:51:48 +0100 >> > From: Pascal Stumpf <pascal.stu...@cubes.de> >> > >> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:26:42 +0100, Marc Espie wrote: >> > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:00:44PM +0100, Pascal Stumpf wrote: >> > > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:41:45 +0100 (CET), Mark Kettenis wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > The s/restrict/__restrict/g in cstdio shouldn't be necessary. >> > > > >> > > > Apparently, clang++ interprets "restrict" as parameter name, i.e.: >> > > > >> > > > attr.cc:1:50: error: redefinition of parameter 'restrict' >> > > > extern "C" int foo(const char * restrict, char * restrict, ...) >> > > > ^ >> > > > attr.cc:1:33: note: previous declaration is here >> > > > extern "C" int foo(const char * restrict, char * restrict, ...) >> > > > ^ >> > > > >> > > > This might indeed be a bug, but I'd have to read the C++ standard to be >> > > > sure. In pure C, clang doesn't complain. >> > > >> > > I'm not that surprised. restrict is C99. It's not part of C++98. >> > > >> > > Googling for restrict and C++ show various bug-reports explicitly stating >> tha >> > > t >> > > library headers should probably adapt. >> > > >> > > I don't have access to C++ 2011 yet, but from n3242, it seems that it doe >> s >> > > now refer to C99 instead of C89, so restrict is probably leggit in C++201 >> 1. >> > > >> > > So it looks to me like clang in C++98 mode is totally right to not recogn >> ize >> > > restrict as a keyword! >> > >> > Yes, you're right. And clang++ -std=c++0x does recognise restrict as a >> > keyword. cstdio should be adapted (and gcc 4.6 does indeed have >> > __restrict over restrict). >> >> Still worth checking if only removing the XXX_CHECK defines and >> leaving the XXX_DYNAMIC defines helps. > > Yes, it does. :) Thanks! >
pascal, thanks for the persistent follow-up. all, please get this in. finally clang++ is usable, and can be used without any problems in ports! thanks
