On 1/31/24 14:07, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 02:00:18PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/31/24 10:55, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 08:53:00AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/31/24 03:40, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:19 AM Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote:
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
We plan to deprecate -fconcepts-ts in GCC 15 and remove the flag_concepts_ts
code. This note is an admonishing reminder to convert the Concepts TS
code to C++20 Concepts.
What does "deprecated in GCC 15" mean? Given you output the notice with
GCC 14 it would be better to state when it's going to be removed -
it's effectively
"deprecated" right now then? Or will it continue to "work" forever
until it bitrots?
Sorry for the wrong choice of words. I meant deprecated now, removed later.
Agreed, it's deprecated now. We talked about it having no effect in GCC 15;
the message could say that. Or we could leave it vague and just say it's
deprecated.
Please also update invoke.texi.
Like this?
Hmm, I'm not sure whether we want to actually remove the option or just the
support, as with -fcilkplus. I was assuming the latter, in which case the
patch could use some further rewording, but perhaps in the case of
extensions like this (and Cilk+) it makes sense to actually remove the
option. Any other opinions?
I assumed that we'd turn fconcepts-ts into "Ignore", since we've kept
even options like fdeduce-init-list or ffor-scope around.
I suppose in GCC 15 it should be marked as WarnRemoved, but fcilkplus isn't
WarnRemoved, so I'm not sure.
Should I have said "ignored in GCC 15"?
WarnRemoved sounds right, and since that also says "removed" the patch
is OK as is.
Jason
