[llvm-dev] Quality of LLVM headers

[Justin Bogner via llvm-dev]

Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 05:05:18PM +0000, Paweł Bylica via llvm-dev wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016, 17:57 Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at bec.de> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 03:24:22PM +0000, Paweł Bylica via llvm-dev wrote:
>> > > Hi LLVM,
>> > >
>> > > I want to complain a bit about the quality of the code included in the
>> > > public LLVM headers. For projects that depend on LLVM is really hard to
>> > > just include LLVM headers not to trigger tons of warnings.
>> > >
>> > > Moreover, the is this issue that you have to define __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS
>> > and
>> > > __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS everywhere just to include single DataTypes.h.
>> > > Strangely, it seems to be required only when compiling with clang, not
>> > with
>> > > GCC.
>> > >
>> > > Can we do anything to improve the situation?
>> > >
>> > > I have just one idea, to add unittests that only include public headers
>> > > with higher compiler restrictions than for LLVM code in .cpp files.
>> >
>> > Get a system with C++11 compliant system headers.
>> >
>> 
>> What do you mean exactly? How is this related?
>
> __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS and co are requirements by C99 superseded by C++11.
> If your system headers correctly implement C++11, you don't need them.

Apparently DataTypes.h does the following:

  #if !defined(__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS)
  # error "Must #define __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS before #including Support/DataTypes.h"
  #endif

I'm guessing this is what Paweł is talking about. Maybe this is an
obsolete check from before we required a C++11 compliant host compiler?