On Wed, 19 May 2021, Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 16:50, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > This patch is missing documentation (in cpp.texi) and tests for the value
> > of the macro.
> >
>
> Indeed. How about this new version?
This version is OK.
--
Joseph S. Myer
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 16:50, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> This patch is missing documentation (in cpp.texi) and tests for the value
> of the macro.
>
Indeed. How about this new version?
Thanks
Christophe
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> jos...@codesourcery.com
commit d0e79f75dc3723231609f24e2840ac5858a652
This patch is missing documentation (in cpp.texi) and tests for the value
of the macro.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
The toolchain provided by ST for stm32 has had support for
__FILENAME__ for a while, but clang/llvm has recently implemented
support for __FILE_NAME__, so it seems better to use the same macro
name in GCC.
It happens that the ST patch is similar to the one proposed in PR
c/42579.
Given these inpu
