This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Getting glibfortran to build on newlib targets aka. missingstdint.h (PR 14325)


On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:

> Ok, strike the asterisked part.  Should I interpret your answer
> as an approval of direction generally, for a GCC-provided
> stdint.h along the directions in PR 448?  Now in stage3
> (provided it's ok with RM) or next stage1?  (Not providing
> stdint.h is arguably a bug.)

GCC should provide <stdint.h>.  I think any implementation taking account 
of the points discussed in that bug would be welcome in stage 1 or stage 2 
at least and you should be able to get help identifying what the types 
should be for any targets you don't have access to which already have 
their own <inttypes.h> or <stdint.h>.

> Yes, I read PR 448, but I don't interpret anything there as
> geoffk being in the progress of implementing it; I just see
> (good) suggestions.  Not sure it being best with a single
> "#pragma GNUC stdint" though (i.e. I agree with your #7).

I may have been thinking more of

<geoffk> I'd probably even help, it's been on my list for a while

from the IRC discussion that resulted in comments 6 and 7.

> >  Also note the other comments in that
> > bug (e.g. as regards using C99+TC1, not plain C99).
> 
> Will I find TC1 at the same official channels I acquired a copy
> of C99?

ISO and IEC should send the PDF of TC1 free of charge (and maybe printed 
copies).  TC2 was sent to National Bodies for ballot and approved but I 
don't know how well any public draft corresponds to the version balloted.  
The <stdint.h> changes in TC2 add a requirement that the exact-width types 
have no padding bits and two's complement representations (true for all 
GCC-supported targets) and permit freestanding implementations not to 
define limits for wint_t and sig_atomic_t if they don't have a notion of 
such types (but GCC does always have an internal notion of wint_t, though 
it hasn't yet needed to know about sig_atomic_t).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]