ldionne added inline comments.
================ Comment at: libcxx/include/new:240 return __align > __STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__; +#elif defined(_LIBCPP_CXX03_LANG) + return __align > alignment_of<__libcpp_max_align_t>::value; ---------------- So, IIUC what you're saying, `__STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__` is provided by recent Clangs in C++03 mode? I tested it and it does seem to be correct. (side note: I tend to think we should be more aggressive to remove old compiler support, since most people don't upgrade their stdlib without upgrading their compiler anyway). So if we don't care about supporting old compilers that don't provide that macro, we could just get rid of this `#elif`, and such compilers would error out when trying to use `max_align_t` in the `#else` below. That appears reasonable to me. We'd still leave the `#if TEST_STD_VER >= 11` in the tests below, since in C++03 we wouldn't provide `std::max_align_t`, however testing that we use overaligned new in the same conditions in C++03 and C++11 becomes trivial, because it's the same code path. Did I get what you meant correctly? If so, that sounds like a viable path forward to me, since we're simplifying the code. We're also improving on our C++03 conformance, which isn't considered good but is certainly not considered bad either. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D73245/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D73245 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
