On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:06 PM, David Majnemer <david.majne...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Aaron Ballman <aa...@aaronballman.com> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Andrey Bokhanko >> <andreybokha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Now I'm completely confused... :-) >> > >> > Can we rely that this MS engineer has enough authority to declare this >> > to be a bug? >> >> He's on the compiler team, so yes. >> >> > And more importantly -- is MS willing to fix the [supposed] bug in >> > future MSVC compilers? I frankly don't think so... >> >> We can only guess what Microsoft is going to do and when. However, we >> do not aim to be bug for bug compatible with MSVC unless there's very >> good reason to do so, and I've yet to see any justification to warrant >> that for this bug. Further, there's additional burden. If Microsoft >> fixes this bug, are we going to then update our code to only support >> it in a certain range of -fms-compatibility-version values? Or are we >> going to have a compatibility hack that Microsoft doesn't have? etc. > > > Here is my thinking: > If there is code out there in a wild that depends on this, then we should > take this patch.
That was what I meant by "justification". I would say it has to be reasonably compelling code (win32 headers, boost, some other major library) as that's our usual bar for these sort of bug-for-bug compatible things, as I understand it. > Once Microsoft releases a compiler which supports the conforming behavior, > we should limit it's scope to a specific range of versions. > We've done this in the past for things like _Atomic. Agreed, we have a way forward if we need it. I mostly just want to avoid the burden of supporting that because this is sufficiently weird (being a non-conforming keyword). ~Aaron > >> >> >> > Either way, it's up to Reid to decide what to do. Reid? >> >> It is not solely up to Reid to decide what to do. It's up to us as a >> community as to what we want to support and maintain long-term and >> that requires some amount of consensus. Also, Reid is not the only >> Windows maintainer. ;-) >> >> ~Aaron > > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
