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: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:43:56 +0200
- Subject: Re: [09/nn] Add a fixed_size_mode_pod class
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.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 5C0DD4E4C6
- 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>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 02:43:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Richard Sandiford
> <richard.sandiford@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Richard Sandiford
> >> <richard.sandiford@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>> This patch adds a POD version of fixed_size_mode. The only current use
> >>> is for storing the __builtin_apply and __builtin_result register modes,
> >>> which were made fixed_size_modes by the previous patch.
> >>
> >> Bah - can we update our host compiler to C++11/14 please ...?
> >> (maybe requiring that build with GCC 4.8 as host compiler works,
> >> GCC 4.3 has -std=c++0x, but I'm quite sure that's not enough).
> >
> > That'd be great :-) It would avoid all the poly_int_pod stuff too,
> > and allow some clean-up of wide-int.h.
>
> Can you figure what oldest GCC release supports the C++11/14 POD handling
> that would be required?
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.
Jakub