This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at linaro dot org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:43:14 +0200
- Subject: Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=jakub at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 593202C9723
- References: <87wp3mxgir.fsf@linaro.org> <87tvyqw1ki.fsf@linaro.org> <CAFiYyc2HVnJSurbSk=_4hwmg__hdkq_7EQfk1PFwP8AtFxv3Gg@mail.gmail.com> <87y3ny14rf.fsf@linaro.org> <CAFiYyc35qW0WyLEPgPy4Z7SdFZXqB=mjU=wATv=qNZfNwtV18w@mail.gmail.com> <20171026194356.GV14653@tucnak> <CAFiYyc1WB9n=AYEV8F2ojaUnSBSEbXc_FMvWm=N_CykUY21hHA@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:35:56AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > I think it is too early for that, we aren't LLVM or Rust that don't really
> > care about what build requirements they impose on users.
>
> That's true, which is why I asked. For me requiring sth newer than GCC 4.8
> would be a blocker given that's the system compiler on our latest server
> (and "stable" OSS) product.
>
> I guess it depends on the amount of pain we have going forward with C++
> use in GCC. Given that gdb already requires C++11 people building
> GCC are likely already experiencing the "issue".
Well, they can always start by building a new GCC and then build GDB with
it. If they'd need to build an intermediate, already unsupported, GCC in
between as well, it might be bigger pain.
GCC 4.8 as system compiler certainly needs to be supported, it is still
heavily used in the wild, but I'd say even e.g. GCC 4.4 or 4.3 isn't
something that can be ignored. And there are also non-GCC system compilers
we need to cope with.
Jakub