PATCH: ARM EABI libsupc++ routines

[Mark Mitchell]

Paul Brook wrote:

>On Thursday 16 September 2004 10:03, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>  
>
>>On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 04:43, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>+ #ifdef __ARM_EABI__
>>>+   return x;
>>>+ #endif
>>>  }
>>>      
>>>
>>Why don't you  #define __cxa_dtor_return(x) in the appropriate headers
>>to do the right thing (ie on ARM to return X and on generic to just
>>return)?  Then the main code doesn't need to contain #ifdefs.
>>    
>>
>
>You could probably reuse/rename __cxa_vec_ctor_return_type and 
>_GLIBCXX_CXA_VEC_CTOR_RETURN, they're effectively the same thing.
>  
>
I intentionally did not use _GLIBCXX_CXA_VEC_CTOR_RETURN because this 
was a compiler test, and, as such, might want to be run against some 
other C++ runtime library.  That test case also already contained 
"#ifdef __ARM_EABI__" for its definition of "padding".

If we think that this is a library test, and not a compiler test, then 
we should probably move it into the V3 tetsuite, in which case I would 
agree that it would make sense to use _GLIBCXX_CXA_VEC_CTOR_RETURN.  
Thoughts?

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
(916) 791-8304
mark@codesourcery.com