[libcxx patch] Let module.modulemap require cxx_atomics for the atomics module

[Nico Weber]

r218372, thanks!

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> Yep. We should figure out how best to add tests for libc++'s module map in
> the near future, but this LGTM for now.
> On 23 Sep 2014 16:12, "Nico Weber" <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> when using modules in c++98, libc++ currently fails to build:
>>>>
>>>> While building module 'std' imported from src/disk_interface.h:18:
>>>> In file included from <module-includes>:3:
>>>> /Users/thakis/src/chrome/src/third_party/llvm-build/Release+Asserts/bin/../include/c++/v1/atomic:539:2:
>>>> error: <atomic> is not implemented
>>>> #error <atomic> is not implemented
>>>>  ^
>>>> In file included from src/disk_interface.cc:15:
>>>> src/disk_interface.h:18:10: fatal error: could not build module 'std'
>>>> #include <map>
>>>>  ~~~~~~~~^
>>>>
>>>> The attached patch fixes this by making atomic depend on cxx_atomics.
>>>> Fixes PR21002.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't this just make the atomic submodule always unavailable? We don't
>>> have a cxx_atomics feature, as far as I can see. And cxx_atomic (the
>>> corresponding __has_feature flag) wouldn't work either: module features are
>>> not the same as __has_feature features (see the relevant documentation
>>> here: http://clang.llvm.org/docs/Modules.html#requires-declaration).
>>> cplusplus11 is the best check we have for this.
>>>
>>
>> Aw, bummer. Is the patch ok with s/cxx_atomics/cplusplus11/?
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140923/7df08eaf/attachment.html>