Hello,
I'm looking at #pragma once behavior among the major C/C++ compilers as
part of a proposal paper for standardizing #pragma once. (This is
apparently a very controversial topic)
To put my question up-front: Would GCC ever be open to altering its
#pragma once behavior to bring it more in-lin
fickleness of mtime?
Cheers,
Jeremy
On Sep 6 2024, at 12:25 am, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:04 PM Jeremy Rifkin wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking at #pragma once behavior among the major C/C++ compilers as
>> part of a proposa
traditional
> include guards.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> Am Freitag, dem 06.09.2024 um 00:03 -0500 schrieb Jeremy Rifkin:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking at #pragma once behavior among the major C/C++ compilers as
>> part of a proposal paper for standardizing #pra
emy
On Sep 6 2024, at 8:26 am, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 00:03:23 -0500, Jeremy Rifkin wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking at #pragma once behavior among the major C/C++ compilers as
>> part of a proposal paper for standardizing #pragma once. (Thi
ocation. I started here since GCC's approach is least similar to
that than what MSVC does. It's also easier to reach out to developers on
open source projects.
Thanks,
Jeremy
On Sep 6 2024, at 8:16 pm, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 5:49 PM Jeremy Rifkin wrote:
&g
and why #pragma once might break.
> Early 2000s vs now have a different landscape when it comes to file systems.
Given the landscape today, could it make sense to re-evaluate mtime + content?
Cheers
Jeremy
On Sep 6 2024, at 10:29 pm, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2024, 7:42 PM
o is that it's widely used and despite
implementation divergence most users never run into issues with it. But,
imo, it could at least be a little more reliable. I don't think it's a
reasonable expectation to get people to stop using it.
Cheers,
Jeremy
On Sep 7 2024, at 4:32 am,
