On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 10:02:53AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:16 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:03:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > Clang/LLVM and GCC are ABI compatible (with the known exception of the alignment > > > issue for atomics) and one should be able to mix and match libraries compiled by > > > one with code compiled by the other just fine. > > > > They are known not to be ABI compatible, see e.g. > > https://bugs.llvm.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=42439%2C19909%2C44228%2C12207 > > That is just one arch, has anyone e.g. tried gcc > > make check-gcc check-c++-all RUN_ALL_COMPAT_TESTS=1 ALT_CC_UNDER_TEST=clang \ > > ALT_CXX_UNDER_TEST=clang++ RUNTESTFLAGS=struct-layout-1.exp > > on different architectures? > > That might come up with more. > > > > Is e.g. C++ > > struct A {}; > > struct B { [[no_unique_address]] A a; double b; }; > > passed by value the same between g++ 10 and latest clang++? > It's a bug and should be treated as such. Given it's a c++20 feature I wouldn't > consider it terribly concerning at this stage. Hell, gcc's been all over the map > with this stuff varying release-to-release, particularly for the empty baseclass > stuff. The query above are bugs not related to c++20, and in some of them from the comments it appears LLVM is not willing to fix but instead want to try to change the psABI. The psABI authors stated that they don't intend to change it though. Jakub _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
