From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21479 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2019 21:11:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 21408 invoked by uid 89); 16 Jan 2019 21:11:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 21:11:51 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x0GLBjcO009954 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:11:50 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4AD4B1E7BB; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:11:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035D41E4C2; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:11:44 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 21:11:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Pavel Kryukov Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not expand macros to 'defined' In-Reply-To: <0E004E63-FE19-47E6-B6A7-C647B59F3ACB@frtk.ru> References: <4943ce6216667607c40b630ecba6a4d1@polymtl.ca> <0E004E63-FE19-47E6-B6A7-C647B59F3ACB@frtk.ru> Message-ID: X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg00386.txt.bz2 On 2019-01-16 15:38, Pavel Kryukov wrote: >> which supposedly can handle this fine > > Right, but not with '-Wall -Wextra -Werror' flags. > These pedantic options help us (a little) keeping C++ project portable > between compilers, although we do not intent to have this property on > GDB integration. Thanks, that clears it up. I pushed the patch. Simon