On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>
>
> On 15/05/15 16:05, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Szabolcs Nagy
>> wrote:
>>> The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
>>> because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
>>> n
On 15/05/15 16:05, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>> The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
>> because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
>> namespace and lacks protection against a potential macro definition
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
> because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
> namespace and lacks protection against a potential macro definition
> that is allowed by POSIX. The fix avoi
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 20/04/15 20:00, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>> The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
>> because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
>> namespace and lacks protection against a potential macro definiti
On 20/04/15 20:00, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
> because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
> namespace and lacks protection against a potential macro definition
> that is allowed by POSIX. The fix avoids source level
The posix_memalign declaration is incompatible with musl for C++,
because of the exception specification. It also pollutes the
namespace and lacks protection against a potential macro definition
that is allowed by POSIX. The fix avoids source level namespace
pollution but retains the dependency o
