[cfe-dev] libcxx: Platform independent printing using format constants

[Howard Hinnant]

On Oct 11, 2012, at 9:44 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 7:47 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:35 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> > libc++ does this to pick up the macro definitions:
>> >> >
>> >> > #include <inttypes.h>
>> >> >
>> >> > However, glibc's inttypes.h only provides them in C++ mode if _STDC_FORMAT_MACROS is defined, and libc++ doesn't define it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sorry, needs more underscore: __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS.
>> >>
>> >> Right.  This is C++11-conforming.  27.9.2 [c.files]/p3:
>> >>
>> >> > Table 135 describes header <cinttypes>. [ Note: The macros defined by <cinttypes> are provided unconditionally. In particular, the symbol __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS, mentioned in footnote 182 of the C standard, plays no role in C++. — end note ]
>> >>
>> >> Summary:  <inttypes.h> should not be protecting anything in C++ based on __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS, despite the non-normative footnote in C99's 7.8.1.  When the C++ committee looked at this issue, they told the C committee "thanks but no thanks.".
>> >>
>> > Right, but glibc follows the C99 standard, not the C++11 standard (nor the C11 standard, which removes this unwanted "protection"), so cinttypes needs to define __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS itself if it's going to include a C99 <inttypes.h> header such as glibc's.
>> 
>> That solution won't make a C++11 conforming std::lib.  C++11 also defines <inttypes.h> that *always* provides these macros.
>> 
>> glibc could also follow the C99 standard by not guarding with __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS.  C99 has no normative statements that say it shall guard with __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS.  The only statements it has to such an effect are non-normative.
>> 
>> Additionally the #define __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS in <cinttypes> won't necessarily be effective.  Consider the case that <inttypes.h> has traditional include guards:
>> 
>> #include <inttypes.h>
>> ...
>> #include <cinttypes>
>> ...
>> // PRId64 defined here?
>> 
>> PRId64 may or may not be defined here depending upon whether <inttypes.h> put it under an include guard.
>> 
>> <inttypes.h> is the right place to fix this bug.
>> 
> OK, but where do we work around the bug? Perhaps Clang should always define  __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS in C++ mode.

Another possibility is to define it for needy platforms in libc++'s <__config>.

Howard