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
Hi,
Chris Lattner <clattner@apple.com> skribis:
> On Jan 30, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Ludovic CourtÃs wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Chris Lattner <clattner@apple.com> skribis:
>>
>>> On Jan 20, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21 January 2012 00:32, Vincent Lefevre 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.
>>>>
>>>> And what about the fact other compilers haven't defined such a macro
>>>> for each extension they implement, whether it comes from GCC or not,
>>>> is that GCC's fault too?
>>>
>>> If fact, some do:
>>> http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#feature_check
>>
>> That seems like a very useful approach to solve the problem.
>>
>> The docs say that â__has_builtinâ & co. are macros. What do they expand to?
>
> 0 or 1.
I understand. To put it another way, how are they defined?
Thanks,
Ludoâ.