[PATCH] D26376: Undef stdatomic.h macro definitions that are defining functions provided in libc++ <atomic>

[Richard Smith via cfe-commits]

rsmith added a comment.

Hmm, this won't help when building libc++ as a module, and we don't have a wrapper header to hold these undefs since <stdatomic.h> is not part of c++.

So either that combination of includes gives a broken <atomic> or a broken <stdatomic.h>, or we do something nonstandard like reimplementing the latter in terms of the former in libc++.

Eric, Marshall, what do you think? How / how much should we support this non-c++ header?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D26376