This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/54847] --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes non-functional on darwin
- From: "jeremyhu at macports dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2012 23:25:54 +0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/54847] --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes non-functional on darwin
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-54847-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54847
--- Comment #20 from Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <jeremyhu at macports dot org> 2012-10-07 23:25:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> To repeat what I meant: the autoconf test is built by the C++ compiler. Given
> that, writing 'timespec' or writing 'struct timespec' is exactly the same.
C++ lets you just drop "struct"? My C++ is very rusty, and I didn't realize
that. That seems messy. Thanks for the info.
> Just
> wanted to clarify why, even from a formal point of view, the patch cannot be
> right, I didn't really mean to analyze in any detail the existing autoconf test
> (I didn't write this specific one, IIRC). Again send patches to libstdc++,
> possibly CC Jon.
Yeah, that's why I'm suggesting just dropping the check for _POSIX_TIMERS > 0
... that check seems weird to me, and Jack's test seems to indicate that it's
not needed.