This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/37147] [4.4 Regression]: 20_util/ratio/comparisons/comp2.cc et al
- From: "paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 18 Aug 2008 13:03:09 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/37147] [4.4 Regression]: 20_util/ratio/comparisons/comp2.cc et al
- References: <bug-37147-507@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-08-18 13:03 -------
Therefore, are *all* the errors cause by INTMAX_MAX not being defined? That may
have only to do with the macros on top of bits/postypes.h. Thus you should
check what happens with _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T, _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG, and
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG_LONG.
Something you should also immediately check is whether those tests actually
were run before the changes and not skipped, because the problems are at the
interaction of the dg-require-cstdint and the actual availability of some
specific stdint.h facilities, the macros, which unfortunately in C++ are not
always available together with the rest, but only when __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS is
defined before including the first time <stdint.h>...
In any case, please attach pre-processed comp2.cc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37147