From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matt Sicker Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#15739: Doesn't support clang as well as it could. Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 19:30:57 -0600 Message-ID: References: <877gbs1fqu.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133458edd643704ec6f03bb X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385861531 11298 80.91.229.3 (1 Dec 2013 01:32:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 01:32:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15739@debbugs.gnu.org To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 01 02:32:16 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtP-0003Bg-FM for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Dec 2013 02:32:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53798 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtO-0000Qc-VN for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:32:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38807) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtH-0000QF-GU for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:32:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtC-0000s7-Nz for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:32:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:38232) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtC-0000s3-KV for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:32:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvtC-0005Mp-0p for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:32:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Matt Sicker Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 01:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 15739 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 15739-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B15739.138586146520561 (code B ref 15739); Sun, 01 Dec 2013 01:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15739) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Dec 2013 01:31:05 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52251 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvsG-0005LY-Kj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:31:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:34556) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VmvsF-0005L1-34 for 15739@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:31:03 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ob0-f169.google.com with SMTP id wm4so11467756obc.28 for <15739@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 17:30:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=WZ9qsbhY4wvbOuPQSTN+fHYVPP7UaZnnkcroFXbJhd0=; b=g7R+k94XVKgN9UocI0F5Hz8lmK497MY4gy9jSPSXOZjSXddIzafdj14yNJuJP5zq9m rE5JH3/MO+pCBY+QS0H2dR0JA5Qar0d3h1LNL0P2ztXShZ7WWJSdEzV12W1LEMH+yBjy KDFvxIPi7IiHS9lmjsUz55GR5q3w1NLRpGwPb6CS9c8oYIWCs6iChrMabu01lVZzIkB7 RkE5HgYY5o45x6xkN+i19svHMVE+M4VysIXZQppeGYA0Q+ZWtAGKvqkO3nenLThEt4l2 ghZjiYVivY6LT28P0kWj+/p3Mo24JhDdUG/z2UqCqwY+zpgDJ9eGF6gz9fZ6qs36JZWB 9iWw== X-Received: by 10.60.70.134 with SMTP id m6mr48612717oeu.14.1385861457206; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 17:30:57 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.182.131.102 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 17:30:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <877gbs1fqu.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:7353 Archived-At: --001a1133458edd643704ec6f03bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 28 November 2013 13:35, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > Doesn=E2=80=99t Clang still define __GNUC__? If it does, then it has to = behave > like GCC, and thus nothing Clang-specific needs to be added. > Yeah, turns out it's a different issue. --=20 Matt Sicker --001a1133458edd643704ec6f03bb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2= 8 November 2013 13:35, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrot= e:
Doesn=E2=80=99t Clang still define __GNUC__? =C2=A0If it does, then it has = to behave
like GCC, and thus nothing Clang-specific needs to be added.

Yeah, turns out it's a different= issue.

--=C2=A0
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
--001a1133458edd643704ec6f03bb--