This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: Allow embedded timestamps by C/C++ macros to be set externally (3)


On 16-05-06 08:26:07, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Eduard Sanou <eduardsanou@openmailbox.org> writes:
> 
> > diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.h b/gcc/c-family/c-common.h
> > index 1714284..dea2900 100644
> > --- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.h
> > +++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.h
> > @@ -1086,6 +1086,16 @@ extern vec<tree, va_gc> *make_tree_vector_copy (const vec<tree, va_gc> *);
> >     c_register_builtin_type.  */
> >  extern GTY(()) tree registered_builtin_types;
> >  
> > +/* Read SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH from environment to have a deterministic
> > +   timestamp to replace embedded current dates to get reproducible
> > +   results.  Returns -1 if SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is not defined.  */
> > +extern time_t cb_get_source_date_epoch (cpp_reader *pfile);
> > +
> > +/* The value (as a unix timestamp) corresponds to date 
> > +   "Dec 31 9999 23:59:59 UTC", which is the latest date that __DATE__ and 
> > +   __TIME__ can store.  */
> > +#define MAX_SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH 253402300799
> 
> This is bigger than INT_MAX, doesn't it trigger a warning that breaks
> bootstrap?

Sorry but I don't understand the issue.  Is defining a macro to a
integer bigger than INT_MAX invalid?

-- 
Dhole

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


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