Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190829083233.24162-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <20190830231527.22304-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <20190830231527.22304-5-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <CAKwvOdktYpMH8WnEQwNE2JJdKn4w0CHv3L=YHkqU2JzQ6Qwkew@mail.gmail.com>
 <a5085133-33da-6c13-6953-d18cbc6ad3f5@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <20190905134535.GP9749@gate.crashing.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190905134535.GP9749@gate.crashing.org>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Sep 2019 17:52:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72nXXBgwKcs36R+uau2o1YypfSFKAYWV2xmcRZgz8LRQww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] compiler-gcc.h: add asm_inline definition
To:     Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:45 PM Segher Boessenkool
<segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> [ That's not what a feature test macro is; a feature test macro allows the
>   user to select some optional behaviour.  Things like _GNU_SOURCE.  ]

Yes and no. GNU libc defines feature test macros like you say, but
C++'s feature macros are like Rasmus/Nick are saying. I think libc's
definition is weird, I would call those "feature selection macros"
instead, because the user is selecting between some features (whether
to enable or not, for instance), rather than testing for the features.

> Why would GCC want to have macros for all features it has?  That would be
> quite a few new ones every release.

Maybe GCC wouldn't, but its users, they surely would. For anything
that 1) is a new language feature, 2) breaks backwards-compatibility
with previous (or other compilers) and 3) is expected to be used by
end users, yes, it would be very useful to have.

For the same reasons C++ is adding feature test macros all over the
place nowadays and it is considered good practice (see SD-6: SG10
Feature Test Recommendations).

Cheers,
Miguel