On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 09:10:53AM -0700, Tyler Retzlaff wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 09:30:20AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 11:24:47AM -0700, Tyler Retzlaff wrote:
> > > * Enable optional use of C11 atomics support. * Enable use of C23
> > > typeof operator. * Explicitly force intrinsics when building with
> > > MSVC. * Disable MSVC C runtime checks.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roret...@linux.microsoft.com>
> >
> > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com>
> >
> > If there is going to be a lot of this type of special handling for
> > MSVC, we could look to add a separate config/msvc (and config/gcc-like)
> > directory with separate meson.build files for the different toolchains.
> > Might help centralize all such definitions in one place rather than
> > having conditionals everywhere.
>
> i think that would probably be a good idea. it would untangle the
> toolchain detail from the flow of the build files.
>
> i don't propose introducing it in this series but when this is merged i
> would like to reach out and get your thoughts on how to properly set up a
> config/toolchain-xxx. in addition to the compiler flags and definitions
> below it would be good to suppress (for now) warnings until i have an
> opportunity to evaluate and address the code raising them.
>
Agree on not requiring it for this set. I'm not exactly sure how to split
up the toolchain files, especially given that gcc and clang (and other
llvm-based compilers like icx) are so very, very similar in what we have to
do for them. It would be very wasteful to have individual toolchain files
for each one, duplicating lots of settings. That's why my initial
suggestion was for msvc and "gcc-like" compilers. Any suggestions for a
better name for the latter, welcome! :-)
