Hi,
Am 6. November 2019 09:26:53 MEZ schrieb Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>:
don't make things worse than they originally were if we fall back to
that type again on armel. So if the original code happened to work
well
enough on armel in practice
It built. No more data ;-)
, you could add an appropriate #if/else
(with
a useful comment) around the definition of AtomicCounter and the
accompanying static_assert.
Can do, yes, although I would like it more if it was fine upstream...
(And address any resulting -Wvolatile on
armel as appropriate for your needs.)
As it (is it?) only a warning one can also just ignore it ;-)
Regards
Rene
--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.