http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #11 from Olaf van der Spek ---
Perhaps, but that's not the ideal route.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab ---
Standards also sometimes invent new interfaces if the need arises.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #9 from Olaf van der Spek ---
Standards bodies prefer to standardize existing practise, so I think that's the
wrong way to go. Ideally it's first implemented and only then it gets
standardized.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab ---
So convince one of the standards body that your macro is a good thing to add.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #7 from Olaf van der Spek ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Your own library.
Reinventing the wheel time and time again leads to code duplication which is
bad.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Olaf van der Spek from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> > Well don't call it assert, call it my_assert or something like that.
> >
> > We should not be adding random ex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
Olaf van der Spek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
Olaf van der Spek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60639
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
11 matches
Mail list logo
