* Jakub Jelinek via Gcc: > On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 10:27:13AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote: >> On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 09:18, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> > >> > Perhaps the PR should be reopened with “accepts invalid”? >> >> My impression from the PR is that the reporter was using a different >> ABI, where the name isn't reserved. Maybe the testcase should only be >> accepted with -fno-threadsafe-statics or -ffreestanding or something >> to say "I'm doing things differently". >> >> Or we could just say that G++ reserves the Itanium ABI names >> unconditionally, even if it doesn't need to use them, in which case it >> would be accepts-invalid. > > All identifiers starting with two underscores are reserved for the > implementation already.
But which implementation? __ identifiers are used heavily across the GNU project, not just in GCC and glibc (as one would expect). A lot of C software outside the GNU project is similar. I think this attempt at namespace management has failed. For the Itanium C++ ABI symbols, it would be useful to document which ones can be user-defined (which can be very interesting to avoid a dependency on libstdc++). I do not know how much value there is in supporting a semantically different definition, or a declaration with different types (probably not much). Thanks, Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill
