On Fri, 16 Jul 2021, 09:30 Jakub Jelinek via Libstdc++, < libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:27:09AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 08:41:06AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via > Gcc-patches wrote: > > > --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/max_size_type.h > > > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/max_size_type.h > > > @@ -417,7 +417,10 @@ namespace ranges > > > #endif > > > > > > #if __SIZEOF_INT128__ > > > +#pragma GCC diagnostic push > > > +#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wpedantic" > > > using __rep = unsigned __int128; > > > +#pragma GCC diagnostic pop > > > > At least in simple cases like this, wouldn't > > using __rep = __extension__ unsigned __int128; > > __extension__ using __rep = unsigned __int128; > actually (now tested). > Ah, thanks. I didn't find the right syntax, and I know __extension__ doesn't work in other cases, like quad float literals, so I assumed it doesn't work here. I suppose the literals don't work because the warning comes from the processor, which doesn't understand __extension__ (and also ignores the diagnostic pragma). > Jakub > >
