From patchwork Sun May 5 21:41:31 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Gerald Pfeifer X-Patchwork-Id: 1931609 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@legolas.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pfeifer.com header.i=@pfeifer.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pair-202402271039 header.b=FRzTD7kU; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gcc.gnu.org (client-ip=2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c; helo=server2.sourceware.org; envelope-from=gcc-patches-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@gcc.gnu.org; receiver=patchwork.ozlabs.org) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by legolas.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VXdKd0TC8z1yZk for ; Mon, 6 May 2024 07:41:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D223858429 for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 21:41:51 +0000 (GMT) X-Original-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Received: from hamza.pair.com (hamza.pair.com [209.68.5.143]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29D4E3858D1E for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 21:41:35 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 29D4E3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pfeifer.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pfeifer.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 29D4E3858D1E Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.68.5.143 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714945296; cv=none; b=TMSsyqEQ5lhYbXQ7HGw1S04oJAmX6PKM0tME0GcFKXsyIU0LTCnqPhJbLySQqRQBqcvVX2dHHjrRgtPaRKHoA8y+vZLM78/kz4DXptnVtHAGSJFHpZmj1YOzAJQJ2WByLV59OUHqRAmv9HL6CtCGvnqNJDBH1sSAQy4alzmVnmY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714945296; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZUK1BDPBKcWiGBYWU1r5sNWJGfx6pcj8PCDCMoQdS2Y=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:MIME-Version:DKIM-Signature:Message-Id; b=t2zPlBZLVGQ5XFbNirwrCa5qiZEmAvvV3aVNXg3anXyjb/KoxLcVNxfN8YYhJXthJNyJmnjzTJCBAxY0TqekQU4HF/JCrRldbGw2eOKAWHkoCIZRqv3vgE2NfEQVthEEVCi2Oog56LTcX9jwWsWeDSijwjhohmo189HffXL1/Hc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from hamza.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDF4133E8D for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 17:41:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from daya.localdomain (188-23-56-169.adsl.highway.telekom.at [188.23.56.169]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6537133E8B for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 17:41:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 23:41:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [pushed] wwwdocs: gcc-14/porting_to: Improve markup. MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pfeifer.com; h=date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; s=pair-202402271039; bh=wiBpPPIOkTQ97LfNMXjqYLkZgu7qo4k6HKLxXpflYVw=; b=FRzTD7kUtfT4QIOLTvIcS0YuRcK/SvP+k7WLh+Z+KjotYeVurB0z9qOzH0RWGONvQDdIYnkbSbwQY6PLnU0cYFiVv3r1O5b+UV9Q1LQU2Wk/6zOpRupS1bTLVP/zwzBTFyEWAuUvorE+ZnVUJlptsVCCD+VxXqMwoZG+QiCGWaqbmFnqCMY55s7IdRmHbum7t662Gza9RzuiXK2rJMWYt/prH+vHeKVh9o365DJVb9xWG2ep1kqvW8r24F1VbDWFh9IAnbu5/3l+Yux80oabt5wJB7BFxYd9salDJa2P6dtxYDhJZ+jTSh3WzpaEkuGFBGhJGgHxRZS871G5Fy5Rbg== X-Scanned-By: mailmunge 3.11 on 209.68.5.143 Message-Id: <20240505214133.CDF4133E8D@hamza.pair.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gcc-patches-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@gcc.gnu.org The key change is putting "GCC target" in ... . Pushed. Gerald --- htdocs/gcc-14/porting_to.html | 16 +++++++--------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-14/porting_to.html b/htdocs/gcc-14/porting_to.html index 13772080..db27f122 100644 --- a/htdocs/gcc-14/porting_to.html +++ b/htdocs/gcc-14/porting_to.html @@ -516,18 +516,17 @@ be included explicitly when compiling with GCC 14:

Pragma GCC target now affects preprocessor symbols

-

-The behavior of pragma GCC target and specifically how it affects ISA -macros has changed in GCC 14. In GCC 13 and older, the GCC +

The behavior of pragma GCC target and specifically how +it affects ISA macros has changed in GCC 14. Before the GCC target pragma defined and undefined corresponding ISA macros in C when using the integrated preprocessor during compilation but not when the preprocessor was invoked as a separate step or when using the -save-temps option. In C++ the ISA macro definitions -were performed in a way which did not have any actual effect. +were performed in a way which did not have any actual effect.

-In GCC 14 C++ behaves like C with integrated preprocessing in earlier +

In GCC 14 C++ behaves like C with integrated preprocessing in earlier versions. Moreover, in both languages ISA macros are defined and -undefined as expected when preprocessing separately from compilation. +undefined as expected when preprocessing separately from compilation.

This can lead to different behavior, especially in C++. For example, @@ -552,9 +551,8 @@ incorrect instruction set by GCC 14. which was not intended. */ -

-The fix in this case is to remember whether pop_options -needs to be performed in a new user-defined macro. +

The fix in this case is to remember whether pop_options +needs to be performed in a new user-defined macro.