You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
According to § 6.10.8.3 of the C11 spec, __STDC_NO_ATOMICS__ should be defined in C11 mode when stdatomic.h is not available, as is the case for emscripten.
I use variants of that snippet in several places. I'm working around the issue with an additional && !defined(__EMSCRIPTEN__), but that's obviously sub-optimal.
You should probably also define __STDC_NO_THREADS__ until threads.h provides a complete implementation (i.e., until mtx_t and cnd_t are implemented).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The best place to add that define is in tools/shared.py (around where we define -D__EMSCRIPTEN__ etc.).
However, it seems like we could provide that header - we do have threads and atomics support, in particular pthreads works. Maybe it needs clang integration, though - if so, I'm not sure of the status of that.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because there has been no activity in the past year. It will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 7 days. Feel free to re-open at any time if this issue is still relevant.
According to § 6.10.8.3 of the C11 spec,
__STDC_NO_ATOMICS__
should be defined in C11 mode whenstdatomic.h
is not available, as is the case for emscripten.Testing is easy:
I use variants of that snippet in several places. I'm working around the issue with an additional
&& !defined(__EMSCRIPTEN__)
, but that's obviously sub-optimal.You should probably also define
__STDC_NO_THREADS__
until threads.h provides a complete implementation (i.e., untilmtx_t
andcnd_t
are implemented).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: