This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [patch] Default to --enable-libstdcxx-time=auto
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Rainer Orth <ro at cebitec dot uni-bielefeld dot de>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 11:42:45 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] Default to --enable-libstdcxx-time=auto
- References: <CAH6eHdTgTspzbfHhD3uDwDVD3uXAapb_NMZ0jAZ-4-UjfD4H4g at mail dot gmail dot com> <519C942D dot 6050100 at oracle dot com> <CAH6eHdTjdi75WSwKYfdGBtOeQwbsSvMbzzxo24qofMexFSmETA at mail dot gmail dot com> <519C9AF5 dot 8090300 at oracle dot com> <519C9CBC dot 4050606 at oracle dot com> <519C9E3B dot 60609 at oracle dot com> <CAH6eHdRXAK1r0g7u+50RobAxTo=6DJsvRZzo75m7x+5ir3opKQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 22 May 2013 11:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 22 May 2013 11:30, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>> .. put an abort or something in the dummy implementations, to make sure
>> people don't try to run an executable built with headers which have the
>> clock available linked at run time to a .so which doesn't, really.
>> Suboptimal solution because ideally we would like to fail at build time, but
>> this is the best I have got so far. Be very clear in the docs, anyway.
>
> Based on feedback for <regex> users much prefer to have something
> undefined than to have it defined but non-functional or causing an
> abort.
Could leave the steady_clock::now() symbol "undesignated", like the
__once_call and __once_callable symbols that are only present when
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_TLS is defined?