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: [PATCH 3/6] Emit macro expansion related diagnostics

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 10:23:53 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] Emit macro expansion related diagnostics
References: <CAGWvnyn67+710HX1zJ0VUg8ya0MrxdEmyS0KJgwDJVgoz6ye=w@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1110181516120.24292@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Joseph S. Myers
<joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
>> Hey, Dodji,
>>
>> Your patch broke bootstrap on AIX because of the typedef "loc_t"
>> introduced in tree-diagnostics.c. ?The typedef conflicts with a
>> typedef in an AIX 5.3 header file for locales. ?AIX should not be
>> using that namespace, but the failure occurs before fix-includes, so
>> it is not possible to fix it there.
>
> The whole *_t namespace is reserved by POSIX, so it's not unreasonable for
> AIX to have some AIX-specific *_t typedefs although it seems quite rare
> for this to cause conflicts in practice (and AIX is obviously risking
> conflicts with future POSIX revisions by using *_t for its own types).

any reason we could not call it location_type? or just location?

References:
- Re: [PATCH 3/6] Emit macro expansion related diagnostics
  - From: David Edelsohn
- Re: [PATCH 3/6] Emit macro expansion related diagnostics
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

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