Status of the PPH implementation

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 25 May 2012, Diego Novillo wrote:

> On 12-05-25 12:25 , Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 05/25/2012 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > and it should be possible to eliminate the __need_* special cases
> > > for some system headers by having more, smaller headers set up to define
> > > individual types.
> > 
> > I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> Yes.  Increased modularity in system headers is a must.  That is likely going
> to be one of the hard things to fix.  I'd rather have that discussion in the
> standards forums, as I suspect some of the same will be discussed for the
> module proposal.

If feature test macros (or, similarly, assert.h depending on NDEBUG) are 
the problem then that would need to be addressed for standards - but if 
it's __need_* conditionals then those are an implementation detail for GCC 
and glibc and any changes would need sorting out in the communities for 
those toolchain components.  (I don't know how good the libstdc++ headers 
are at modularity, so I'm thinking about C headers, both those provided by 
GCC and those provided by glibc.)  Or is the issue with system headers 
something else entirely?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com