From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan  2 22:11:07 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70692D01;
 Thu,  2 Jan 2014 22:11:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E13218B5;
 Thu,  2 Jan 2014 22:11:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.0.7] (cpc28-cmbg15-2-0-cust64.5-4.cable.virginm.net
 [86.27.189.65]) (authenticated bits=0)
 by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s02Ln2ea014273
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
 Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:49:04 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: Apple's GCC 42 enhancements (was Re: [CFT] Experimental gcc
 update).
From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <52C5CA79.90706@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:48:57 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C6FA2135-F549-4615-AC77-3909377C8887@FreeBSD.org>
References: <528A924A.8050904@FreeBSD.org> <529127F8.5080606@FreeBSD.org>
 <3826345B-E783-43C7-B4AB-A05C95C1A8A2@FreeBSD.org>
 <52C5CA79.90706@FreeBSD.org>
To: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain
 <freebsd-toolchain.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-toolchain>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2014 22:11:07 -0000

On 2 Jan 2014, at 20:22, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> The behaviour is consistent with llvm-gcc though, as explained here:
>=20
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-gcc-4.2/+bug/483679
>=20
> " looking at the LLVM/Clang documentation =
(http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/InitPreprocessor_8cpp-source.html) shows =
that __block is not actually a keyword, but a macro that is defined to =
be __attribute__((__blocks__(byref)))."
>=20
> Not sure what to do about it, I had added a #define for it in Block.h =
since you have to link with -lBlocksRuntime anyways, but not everything =
includes Block.h (surely not the libdispatch tests).

Probably the best solution is to put this in cdefs.h:

#if defined(__BLOCKS__) && !defined(__block)
#	define __block __attribute__((__blocks__(byref)))
#endif

(With the indentation changed to make it harder to read, as per =
style(9)).  I believe __BLOCKS__ is supported by clang, although testing =
for it is discouraged in favour of the __has_{feature,extension} =
mechanism. =20

David