This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Dealing with compilers that pretend to be GCC
Why not just implement the clang feature checking macros?
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#feature_check
Besides fixing the whole problem that this thread identifies, it doesn't require cramming tons of macros into the initial preprocessor state, speeding up compiler startup time.
-Chris
On Jan 21, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Basile Starynkevitch <basile@starynkevitch.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 01:32:29 +0100
> Vincent Lefevre <vincent+gcc@vinc17.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-20 23:28:07 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> May I politely suggest that this is the wrong place to complain about
>>> other compilers pretending to be GCC :)
>>
>> I think that's the fault of GCC, which should have defined a macro
>> for each extension.
>
>
> I agree with that. And I even hope that if GCC 4.7 defined several macros, one for each
> extensions, like e.g.
> __GCC_HAVE_INDIRECT_GOTO__ for the goto *x; feature
> __GCC_HAVE_STATEMENT_EXPR__ for statement expressions
> etc then perhaps in several years other compilers would do likewise. We just have to
> document our features and their corresponding macros...
>
> Regards.
>
>
> --
> Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
> email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
> 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
> *** opinions {are only mine, sont seulement les miennes} ***