EricWF added a comment. This patch is OK to land as-is.
Doing the cleanup separately makes sense. ================ Comment at: include/type_traits:3683 + +#elif __has_feature(has_trivial_destructor) || (_GNUC_VER >= 403) + ---------------- rsmith wrote: > EricWF wrote: > > We don't support anything before GCC 4.9, so you can replace the GCC guard > > with `|| defined(_LIBCPP_COMPILER_GCC)` > Nice. I'll do this more broadly as a separate patch, if that's OK with you. > There's lots of support for older GCCs scattered around in this file and > elsewhere. That sounds good to me. I'm happy to take over the cleanup if you want. ================ Comment at: include/type_traits:3710 -#if 0 +#ifndef _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS + ---------------- rsmith wrote: > EricWF wrote: > > We should use variadics in C++03 when Clang is the compiler. I would write > > this check as `#if !defined(_LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG) || defined(__clang__)` > Would it make more sense to change the definition of _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS > to do that globally? This same pattern is used in various places in libc++, > both in existing code in `<type_traits>`, in `<future>` (for `packaged_task` > / `async`), and in `<memory>` (for traits and `allocator::construct`). In > every case we're guarding use of variadics to define a template that is > specified as being variadic. I'm trying to replace `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS` with `_LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG`. Almost all usages of `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS` guard more C++11 features than just variadic templates (like rvalue references) -- so simply changing the definition of `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_VARIADICS` may be subtly wrong. I'll work on cleaning the macro up. Repository: rCXX libc++ CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D48292/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D48292 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
