Re: Proposal: Making Debian compiler agnostic
"brian m. carlson" <email@example.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:26:37AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> "Fairly OK" is a good way of putting it. It's not reached the level of
>> "good," but it's probably workable for most practical purposes. You
>> will get spurious warnings about some things, such as some of the
>> __attribute__ tags, but I don't think I've seen a case where it flatly
>> refuses to compile something or miscompiles it. That said, I've not
>> used some of the hairier gcc extensions.
> I have some code that uses the __builtin_ia32_* functions for intrinsics
> that clang refuses to compile because it has different, incompatible
> intrinsics (#653256). Since clang insists on using __GNUC__, it's
> difficult to detect whether the compiler really is GCC or whether it's a
> broken clone (which could be clang or something entirely different).
> clang upstream does not consider this incompatibility a bug; I do.
Yeah, I have similar messes in some of my code.
* LLVM and Clang pretend to be GCC but don't support all of the __attribute__
* settings that GCC does. For them, suppress warnings about unknown
* attributes on declarations. This unfortunately will affect the entire
* compilation context, but there's no push and pop available.
#if !defined(__attribute__) && (defined(__llvm__) || defined(__clang__))
# pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wattributes"
(Note that Clang does support #pragma GCC diagnostic, so it definitely
does support a bunch of the GCC extensions.)
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>