Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23)
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGLJnhpJBrsutH2aK91ARMS+XCez5P8XrR-kwdfSyLXGiQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 9:26 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Fun. Well, now that we insist on C99 support in all branches, > I wonder whether we can just remove all the non-stdbool support. > The one thing that looks tricky is that we insist on sizeof(bool) > being 1, but are there any remaining supported platforms where > it isn't? The buildfarm doesn't have any examples. So far I have found only Apple/Darwin PPC (RIP), where this was occasionally an issue. Some projects would apparently compile with -mone-byte-bool to unbreak local assumptions, but risk breaking ABI with other libraries (as we do?). GCC filed that switch under Darwin options rather than somewhere more general... can we call that a clue that it was highly unusual? https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Darwin-Options.html There may be a systematic way to survey ABIs from the LLVM or GCC source trees... hmm, I am no expert so take this with a grain of salt but I found where the LLVM project defines BoolWidth and BoolAlign, starting from the commit where they removed Darwin PPC support (2fe49ea0), and it looks like it was the only target ABI that overrode the default of 8 there (it had 32, meaning bits). BTW animal "alligator" has just shown the failure. Ah, yes, due to this GCC switch being flipped a couple of days ago: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=55e3bd376b2214e200fa76d12b67ff259b06c212
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: