[llvm-dev] Quality of LLVM headers

[James Y Knight via llvm-dev]

Yes, that check is now incorrectly firing even when it's not necessary to
#define those. It should probably be replaced with something like this:

#if !defined(INT8_C) || !defined(INT8_MAX)
#error "Your inttypes.h didn't define needed macros. (Are you using an old
libc? Might need to define __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS and __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS)"
#endif


On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Paweł Bylica <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, 21:07 Justin Bogner via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> 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 __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS and co are requirements by C99 superseded by C++11.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?
>>
>
> Exactly. This is required to have macros like ULONG_MAX available in
> DataTypes.h. I wander if that requirement can be replaced with something
> less intrusive for projects depending on LLVM.
>
> I can work on changes, but need at least a clue that has a chance to be
> accepted.
>
> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160620/89948571/attachment-0001.html>