Message ID | 201204040936.52315.ebotcazou@adacore.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 09:36:52AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > --- init.c (revision 186078) > +++ init.c (working copy) > @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ > > /* Global values computed by the binder. */ > int __gl_main_priority = -1; > +#if (__GNUC__ * 10 + __GNUC_MINOR__ > 45) Shouldn't this be * 100 and > 405 ? I mean, we already had GCC 2.95, 2.96, 2.97 and 20 + 95 is > 45... Jakub
> Arno, do you have objections to me applying the attached patch to the 4.5 > branch? It makes it possible to build (and bootstrap) the Ada compiler on the > 4.5 branch (oldest supported branch) with the 4.6 compiler, which is now the > system compiler in recent Linux distributions. Well, we don't guarantee such compatibility in general, so I'd like to make it clear that people shouldn't expect this combination to work, and if more complex patches are submitted, we'll likely NOT integrate them. The init.c change is clearly already on the edge of kludgy changes and is NOT ok as is, it requires a clear comments explaining why it's there. OK with the comment changes. Arno
> Shouldn't this be * 100 and > 405 ? I mean, we already had GCC > 2.95, 2.96, 2.97 and 20 + 95 is > 45... This idiom is the one already used in tracebak.c for example. Would that really matter in practice?
> Well, we don't guarantee such compatibility in general, > so I'd like to make it clear that people shouldn't expect this combination > to work, and if more complex patches are submitted, we'll likely NOT > integrate them. That's mainly for GCC developers; without this, it will be a pain to keep testing the 4.5.x Ada compiler on modern Linux distributions. > The init.c change is clearly already on the edge of kludgy changes and is > NOT ok as is, it requires a clear comments explaining why it's there. OK, will add a ??? comment, thanks.
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:08:50AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Shouldn't this be * 100 and > 405 ? I mean, we already had GCC > > 2.95, 2.96, 2.97 and 20 + 95 is > 45... > > This idiom is the one already used in tracebak.c for example. Would that > really matter in practice? It is a bad idiom, given that we already had >= 10 __GNUC_MINOR__ and it is possible we'll have 4.10 as well. E.g. __GNUC_PREREQ macro in glibc shifts left major by 16, but even multiplying by 100 instead of 10 is better. Jakub
> It is a bad idiom, given that we already had >= 10 __GNUC_MINOR__ and it > is possible we'll have 4.10 as well. > E.g. __GNUC_PREREQ macro in glibc shifts left major by 16, but even > multiplying by 100 instead of 10 is better. OK, we'll change the idiom on mainline.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Arnaud Charlet <charlet@adacore.com> wrote: >> Arno, do you have objections to me applying the attached patch to the 4.5 >> branch? It makes it possible to build (and bootstrap) the Ada compiler on the >> 4.5 branch (oldest supported branch) with the 4.6 compiler, which is now the >> system compiler in recent Linux distributions. > > Well, we don't guarantee such compatibility in general, > so I'd like to make it clear that people shouldn't expect this combination > to work, and if more complex patches are submitted, we'll likely NOT > integrate them. Maybe you should start to do that though. Otherwise you'll simply lose the easy (but not required) testing of Ada when I (or others) backport changes to still maintained branches on machines where the system Ada compiler is newer than the oldest maintained branch. So - it's all for your own benefit ;) [you can think of using a new -we-are-building-gcc switch for the compile where you'd enable some backward compatibility or so] Thanks, Richard.
Index: init.c =================================================================== --- init.c (revision 186078) +++ init.c (working copy) @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ /* Global values computed by the binder. */ int __gl_main_priority = -1; +#if (__GNUC__ * 10 + __GNUC_MINOR__ > 45) +int __gl_main_cpu = -1; +#endif int __gl_time_slice_val = -1; char __gl_wc_encoding = 'n'; char __gl_locking_policy = ' '; Index: types.ads =================================================================== --- types.ads (revision 186078) +++ types.ads (working copy) @@ -125,8 +125,9 @@ subtype Big_String is String (Positive); type Big_String_Ptr is access all Big_String; - for Big_String_Ptr'Storage_Size use 0; - -- Virtual type for handling imported big strings + -- Virtual type for handling imported big strings. Note that we should + -- never have any allocators for this type, but we don't give a storage + -- size of zero, since there are legitimate deallocations going on. function To_Big_String_Ptr is new Unchecked_Conversion (System.Address, Big_String_Ptr); @@ -200,13 +201,14 @@ -- Source_Buffer_Ptr, see Osint.Read_Source_File for details. type Source_Buffer_Ptr is access all Big_Source_Buffer; - for Source_Buffer_Ptr'Storage_Size use 0; -- Pointer to source buffer. We use virtual origin addressing for source -- buffers, with thin pointers. The pointer points to a virtual instance -- of type Big_Source_Buffer, where the actual type is in fact of type -- Source_Buffer. The address is adjusted so that the virtual origin -- addressing works correctly. See Osint.Read_Source_Buffer for further - -- details. + -- details. Again, as for Big_String_Ptr, we should never allocate using + -- this type, but we don't give a storage size clause of zero, since we + -- may end up doing deallocations of instances allocated manually. subtype Source_Ptr is Text_Ptr; -- Type used to represent a source location, which is a subscript of a Index: par-ch3.adb =================================================================== --- par-ch3.adb (revision 186078) +++ par-ch3.adb (working copy) @@ -111,7 +111,6 @@ -- current token, and if this is the first such message issued, saves -- the message id in Missing_Begin_Msg, for possible later replacement. - --------------------------------- -- Check_Restricted_Expression -- --------------------------------- @@ -2107,7 +2106,6 @@ Range_Node : Node_Id; Save_Loc : Source_Ptr; - -- Start of processing for P_Range_Or_Subtype_Mark begin Index: uintp.adb =================================================================== --- uintp.adb (revision 186078) +++ uintp.adb (working copy) @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ function Hash_Num (F : Int) return Hnum is begin - return Standard."mod" (F, Hnum'Range_Length); + return Types."mod" (F, Hnum'Range_Length); end Hash_Num; ---------------