On 9 October 2012 14:11, Jack Howarth wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:21:25AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> I don't like the sched_yield macro being set there because it's >> detected correctly by configure anyway, but I'm not going to labour >> that point any more. > > Since we are defining _GLIBCXX_USE_NANOSLEEP in os_defines.h and effectively > implementing half of the behavior of --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes, it seemed > odd to not complete the process and define _GLIBCXX_USE_SCHED_YIELD as well. > The usage is not as straight-forward as many other configure options > (especially in light of the absence of rt timer support on darwin).
Why does that absence affect the usage of the option? For darwin there is no difference between --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes and --enable-libstdcxx-time=rt, which should make it easier to use, not harder, because there's no need to choose between the two. >> >> OK for trunk, it's not a regression so I'm not sure about the >> branches. If it doesn't cause problems on the trunk we can decide >> whether to apply it to the 4.7 branch later. > > I guess the question is which branches have enough C++11 standard support to > make the change meaningful to the end user. Surely the question is the usual one of whether to make a change to a release branch if it doesn't fix a regression.
