On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:38 AM Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 02:29:32AM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Richard Shaw wrote on 2019/02/27 2:23:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So... I guess Qt "foreach" behavior changed with gcc9..
> > >
> >
> > Is there any chance this will change or magically get fixed if qt is
> > rebuilt with gcc 9?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Richard
> >
>
> Well, foreach or Q_FOREACH is just a "#define" macro (from /usr/include/Qt/qglobal.h and
> /usr/include/QtCore/qglobal.h), so rebuilding qt(4) itself does not sense.
The Q_FOREACH macro relied on a G++ bug, which got fixed (in particular, g++
rejects forever break; and continue; in statement expressions
outside of a loop body (condition, init expr, increment expr) if there is
no outer loop, but due to a bug if it got past this check, for C++ would
jump to the break/continue labels of the inner rather than outer loop; for C
we got it right, and for GCC 9 finally fixed it.
You need the
https://github.com/qt/qtbase/commit/c35a3f519007af44c3b364b9af86f6a336f6411b
fix, which should be in reasonably recent Qt, but if some packages use very
old headers, the patch needs to be applied...
I created a patch based on that commit and am uploading an SRPM scratch build (I didn't want to commit it if it's wrong) but it is uploading VERY slowly.
Thanks,
Richard
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
