This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Solaris pragma macro expansion
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I also think that it makes sense to follow the vendor specification;
> I'm fine with adding this capability to GCC. Two things. First,
> please add arguments to cpp_register_pragma rather than introducing a
> new interface. There is no ABI or API guarantee for libcpp. Second,
There is a new argument to cpp_register_pragma - it's the
c_register_pragma wrapper that gets a new counterpart. Now, there is no
API guarantee for the back-end interface either, so I can certainly change
things to have an additional argument to c_register_pragma; I suppose the
original idea was to reduce churn in other back ends.
> did you test this with C++ as well as C? I am not certain that the
> macro expansion logic works when #pragmas are deferred - specifically,
> if you have
> #define y12 12
> #pragma align(y12)
> #undef y12
> I suspect that the #pragma will see y12 as a defined macro in C, but
> not in C++.
I haven't been testing this patch series with C++ (the first patch adding
the port had an ICE building libstdc++-v3, and I wanted to get things
closer to a known working state before investigating that in case some
part of the port not yet merged to mainline contained the fix for the
ICE). I think the macros will be expanded but in the wrong context of
macro definitions (i.e. y12 won't be seen as defined in C++). Any
suggestions on good ways to fix this?
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
email@example.com (personal mail)
firstname.lastname@example.org (CodeSourcery mail)
email@example.com (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)