[llvm-commits] [llvm] r172156 - /llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h

[Dmitri Gribenko]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
<joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 04:37:34AM +0200, Dmitri Gribenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:33 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
>> <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:13:51AM -0000, Dmitri Gribenko wrote:
>> >> Author: gribozavr
>> >> Date: Thu Jan 10 19:13:51 2013
>> >> New Revision: 172156
>> >>
>> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172156&view=rev
>> >> Log:
>> >> Add a new portability macro LLVM_FUNCTION_NAME, that expands to __func__, if
>> >> supported.
>> >>
>> >> Modified:
>> >>     llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Support/Compiler.h
>> >
>> > Why don't you add
>> >
>> > #if defined(_MSC_VER)
>> > #define __func__ __FUNCTION__
>> > #endif
>> >
>> > to config.h?
>>
>> Because __func__ should be defined as:
>>
>> static const char __func__[] = "function-name";
>>
>> Replacements available in other compilers might behave in a different
>> way, thus we need a different name to avoid confusion.
>
> Eh, no. The main point is that you can't use __func__ in ways that
> expect string merging, so "foo" __func__ "bar" doesn't work unlike e.g.
> GCC's __FUNCTION__. __func__ can always be replaced by "" with minimal
> lose of functionality.

I don't see how this contradicts what I said: available replacements
might have different behavior.

Anyway, #define __func__ <anything> is UB since name __func__ is reserved.

Dmitri

-- 
main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if
(j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>*/