| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Summary:
After putting this question up on cfe-dev I have decided that it would be best to allow the use of `<atomic>` in C++03. Although static initialization is a concern the syntax required to get it is C++11 only. Meaning that C++11 constant static initialization cannot silently break in C++03, it will always cause a syntax error. Furthermore `ATOMIC_VAR_INIT` and `ATOMIC_FLAG_INIT` remain defined in C++03 even though they cannot be used because C++03 usages will cause better error messages.
The main change in this patch is to replace `__has_feature(cxx_atomic)`, which only returns true when C++ >= 11, to `__has_extension(c_atomic)` which returns true whenever clang supports the required atomic builtins.
This patch adds the following macros:
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_C_ATOMIC_IMP` - Defined on clang versions which provide the C `_Atomic` keyword.
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_GCC_ATOMIC_IMP` - Defined on GCC > 4.7. We must use the fallback atomic implementation.
* `_LIBCPP_HAS_NO_ATOMIC_HEADER` - Defined when it is not safe to include `<atomic>`.
`_LIBCPP_HAS_C_ATOMIC_IMP` and `_LIBCPP_HAS_GCC_ATOMIC_IMP` are mutually exclusive, only one should be defined. If neither is defined then `<atomic>` is not implemented and including `<atomic>` will issue an error.
Reviewers: chandlerc, jroelofs, mclow.lists
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D11555
llvm-svn: 245463
|
