On 26.02.2020 14:49, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> I propose to expose max_align_t unconditionally to C and C++ namespaces.
>>
>> It was introduced in C11/C++11, but in practice it is used in C++ code
>> that formally builds in the
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 02:00:08PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> While we're already touching this, I wonder if we should extend it to
> cover alignment for AVX types. In particular __m512i requires 512-bit
> alignment while our max_align_t currently has 128-bit alignment
> on amd64.
We do not gua
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> I propose to expose max_align_t unconditionally to C and C++ namespaces.
>
> It was introduced in C11/C++11, but in practice it is used in C++ code
> that formally builds in the C++03/older mode (llvm libc++ expects it
> unconditi
On 26.02.2020 14:00, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-02-26 at 12:37 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> I propose to expose max_align_t unconditionally to C and C++ namespaces.
>>
>> It was introduced in C11/C++11, but in practice it is used in C++ code
>> that formally builds in the C++03/older m
On Wed, 2020-02-26 at 12:37 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> I propose to expose max_align_t unconditionally to C and C++ namespaces.
>
> It was introduced in C11/C++11, but in practice it is used in C++ code
> that formally builds in the C++03/older mode (llvm libc++ expects it
> unconditionally)
I propose to expose max_align_t unconditionally to C and C++ namespaces.
It was introduced in C11/C++11, but in practice it is used in C++ code
that formally builds in the C++03/older mode (llvm libc++ expects it
unconditionally).
http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00237-max_align_t.txt
Instead of a
