On Friday 2014-10-24 16:49, Jason Merrill wrote:
> OK. Gerald, were you thinking of specific software that would be
> affected by this change?
I do not recall which pieces I had in mind back then.
In general I did make the experience (updating the GCC ports for
FreeBSD) that there is a lot o
OK. Gerald, were you thinking of specific software that would be
affected by this change?
Jason
I want to resurrect this patch that I didn't pursue for 4.8, because
our violates this very explicit requirement in the C++11
and C++14 standards:
18.10 [support.runtime] p8
"The header and the header shall not define
macros named bool, true, or false."
Is the gcc/ginclude/stdbool.h change OK
On 4 February 2012 23:35, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> For what it's worth, I strongly suggest that you only define those when
> __cpluplus is pre-C++11.
>
> There is simply too much software out there which will run into this
Really? Why would any C++ code assume "bool" is defined as a macro?
It's bee
For what it's worth, I strongly suggest that you only define those when
__cpluplus is pre-C++11.
There is simply too much software out there which will run into this
and being aggressive in breaking (admittedly non-standard confirming
programs) gives GCC a bad reputation and is not nice to our us
I've just seen Richard's status email, so I guess this should wait for 4.8
On 9 January 2012 08:48, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> GCC's implementation of is not valid for C++11 because
> [support.runtime] p8 says "The header and the header
> shall not define macros named bool, true, or false."
>
> T
GCC's implementation of is not valid for C++11 because
[support.runtime] p8 says "The header and the header
shall not define macros named bool, true, or false."
This patch adds a libstdc++ test for that requirement and adjusts
stdbool.h to meet it. I've left _Bool defined in C++ as a GNU
extens
