https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65467
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeff Hammond from comment #3) > Do you seriously pick this one time to prevent the user from even trying to > write incorrect code, while allowing an uncountable number of others? This is different because the semantics are not defined at all. > > One of the motivations for writing code that mixes C11 and OpenMP is because > I am a member of the OpenMP working group devoted to supporting C11 and > C++14 in the OpenMP standard. By refusing to allow me to experiment with > OpenMP+C11, you actively harm progress in the OpenMP standard that would > allow you to resolve the semantic ambiguity that motivated disabling > C11+OpenMP in the first place. If you are part of the working group then you should be able to help define the semantics instead of complaining we disable things :).
