| Message ID | 20211231132006.67978-1-iain@sandoe.co.uk |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [pushed] libgfortran: Fix bootstrap on targets without static_assert macro. | expand |
diff --git a/libgfortran/runtime/string.c b/libgfortran/runtime/string.c index 21585f48dc9..5bc202320c0 100644 --- a/libgfortran/runtime/string.c +++ b/libgfortran/runtime/string.c @@ -242,8 +242,8 @@ gfc_itoa (GFC_UINTEGER_LARGEST n, char *buffer, size_t len) integers (we would need three calls), but they do suffice for all values up to 2^127, which is the largest that Fortran can produce (-HUGE(0_16)-1) with its signed integer types. */ - static_assert(sizeof(GFC_UINTEGER_LARGEST) <= 2 * sizeof(uint64_t), - "integer too large"); + _Static_assert (sizeof(GFC_UINTEGER_LARGEST) <= 2 * sizeof(uint64_t), + "integer too large"); GFC_UINTEGER_LARGEST r; r = n % TEN19;
Although we build the library with GCC which is known to support _Static_assert this might be done on a system without the macro mapping static_assert to the compiler keyword. The use of static_assert introduced with r12-6126-g3430132f3e82 causes bootstrap to fail on such targets, fixed by using the keyword directly. tested on i686-darwin9 and x86_64-darwin18, without regressions, pushed to master as an obvious bootstrap fix (and as approved by FX). thanks Iain Signed-off-by: Iain Sandoe <iain@sandoe.co.uk> libgfortran/ChangeLog: * runtime/string.c (gfc_itoa): Use _Static_assert directly instead of via the static_assert macro. --- libgfortran/runtime/string.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)