Having the ability to detect the variant seems useful. The ABI tweaks
that ARM uses does become visible to the ABI support library (e.g.
__cxa_guard_*). Having the ability to detect the variant would permit
additional flexibility and permit that the runtime validate that the
variant matches.

I don't have a suggestion on how to represent the variant information
however.

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:54 PM Richard Smith <richard_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I think it makes sense to have semi-standard macros for this, and while
> these aren't standard features I think SD-6 could be an OK home for them.
>
> Do you anticipate needing any way to detect abi variants (eg, ARM ABI is
> itanium with tweaks)?
>
> I think some kind of version could be useful for both macros, but that
> could be added later.
>
> On 6 Jan 2017 5:45 pm, "Saleem Abdulrasool" <compnerd_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if it would be possible to add a macro to identify the
> underlying ABI that the C++ runtime is using? Although itanium is the more
> popular choice, there are alternative ABIs such as the one which Microsoft
> uses. I would propose something like the following:
>
> __cpp_abi_itanium
> __cpp_abi_microsoft
>
> They would be defined to 1 based on which is being used. This would allow
> the implementation to change the behavior based on the ABI being used.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Saleem Abdulrasool
> compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Features mailing list
>
>
> Features_at_[hidden]
>
>
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
>
>
>
>
>
>
>