On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 11:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:57:32AM +0100, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> > On 08/01/2025 11:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > > +#ifndef _GLIBCXX26_CONSTEXPR
> > > > +# if __cplusplus >= 202303L
> > > Shouldn't that be 202400L instead? I mean that is
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:57:32AM +0100, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> On 08/01/2025 11:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > +#ifndef _GLIBCXX26_CONSTEXPR
> > > +# if __cplusplus >= 202303L
> > Shouldn't that be 202400L instead? I mean that is what
> > -std=c++26/-std=gnu++26 predefines and has been histo
On 08/01/2025 11:49, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
+#ifndef _GLIBCXX26_CONSTEXPR
+# if __cplusplus >= 202303L
Shouldn't that be 202400L instead? I mean that is what
-std=c++26/-std=gnu++26 predefines and has been historically what we've been
using for next version.
I think clang++ also predefines 202
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> The attached patch adds _GLIBCXX26_CONSTEXPR, in preparation for adding
> `constexpr` on some functions starting in C++26.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Giuseppe D'Angelo
> From 61115549376a29558eb7753f525daf671c6da929 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
