This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: basic-improvements merge status
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:24:12 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > The simplest approach would be something like TARGET_MEM_FUNCTIONS.
>
> OK, I will create updated patch with TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS macro and set
> it via linux.h file. Does this sound sane?
(a) The macro should be defined so that the normal sense (no definition in
the .h file) is that the C99 functions _are_ available, as this will be
usual in future. TARGET_MEM_FUNCTIONS is the wrong way round; using the
standard functions should be the default.
(b) If the approach of replacing missing functions in libgcc is followed
(which can also get rid of TARGET_MEM_FUNCTIONS) then it might be more
appropriate to use a list in config.gcc of missing C library functions
that need to go in libgcc.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk