BX and BGFX do not support the conformant MSVC preprocessor about bgfx HOT 12 CLOSED

Don't know how this is related to bx or bgfx? What's the actual issue here?!

from bgfx.

If you enable the confirming preprocessor, bx and bgfx cannot compile

from bgfx.

But what's the issue?

What about GCC and Clang, they don't have conforming processor?

from bgfx.

The issue is you have preprocessor macros that only run on msvc (that overcome the issues), precisely because msvc has a non conforming preprocessor, like this one: https://github.com/bkaradzic/bx/blob/dc3bf2990e62e8e8764de1f430637aa26e333296/include/bx/macros.h#L14

from bgfx.

I think he's saying that the workarounds are no longer needed with an up-to-date version of MSVC (potentially after adding the /Zc:preprocessor flag. Not really an issue if you ask me, but more of a hint that these can be refactored in the future.

from bgfx.

I think he's saying that the workarounds are no longer needed with an up-to-date version of MSVC (potentially after adding the /Zc:preprocessor flag. Not really an issue if you ask me, but more of a hint that these can be refactored in the future.

Nope, you actually can't ever refactor these out, unless you want to drop support for all MSVC compilers older than VS 2017 V15.8 (and that don't have the flag set), additionally, leaving it alone will prevent this from compiling on C++20 for MSVC (or if the flag has been set) because the current MSVC macros workarounds break during compilation with a conforming preprocessor.

Because of the cpp world we live in, the msvc macro workarounds just need to check if the non conforming preprocessor is also enabled, otherwise you lose backwards or forwards compatibility.

from bgfx.

leaving it alone will prevent this from compiling on C++20 for MSVC

bx/bgfx/etc. is only C++17 right now. ETA for C++20 adoption is sometime in 2025.

At some point I'll just flip the switch to new MSVC conforming preprocessor. Until then we assume it doesn't have conforming preprocessor.

from bgfx.

leaving it alone will prevent this from compiling on C++20 for MSVC

bx/bgfx/etc. is only C++17 right now. ETA for C++20 adoption is sometime in 2025.

At some point I'll just flip the switch to new MSVC conforming preprocessor. Until then we assume it doesn't have conforming preprocessor.

Unless I'm misreading something in GENie, BGFX compiles as c++14 on MSVC...

But also why are you even against adding a few lines of code to support a compiler option that you're going to have to support next year anyway?

from bgfx.

Unless I'm misreading something in GENie, BGFX compiles as c++14 on MSVC...

https://github.com/bkaradzic/bx/blob/3072cf37dfb4b91da2ac057815ee8f0b209424d8/scripts/toolchain.lua#L209

But also why are you even against adding a few lines of code to support a compiler option that you're going to have to support next year anyway?

Because every separate code path adds maintenance cost... Once I decide it's time to support it, I'll spend time to remove old code paths.

from bgfx.

https://github.com/bkaradzic/bx/blob/3072cf37dfb4b91da2ac057815ee8f0b209424d8/scripts/toolchain.lua#L209

Ah, I missed that because I forgot to check BX.

Because every separate code path adds maintenance cost... Once I decide it's time to support it, I'll spend time to remove old code paths.

But it's not a separate code path, it's adding an extra condition to the couple places that have this divergent behavior, the only way that this would add a new line of code is if you chose to wrap the checking in a "BX_HAS_TRADITIONAL_MSVC_PREPROCESSOR" macro or something like that, either way your just &&-ing an extra conditional(s) onto the couple places with the already if elsed MSVC traditional preprocessor behavior.

from bgfx.

@Zarklord you're wasting my time... I don't have time to bikeshed about some nonsense. If you need this, you can fork bx/bgfx and modify it for yourself.

I don't see the issue with current setup.

from bgfx.

@Zarklord you're wasting my time... I don't have time to bikeshed about some nonsense. If you need this, you can fork bx/bgfx and modify it for yourself.

I don't see the issue with current setup.

It's ironic that your complaining about not having time to talk about this when it would have taken less time to fix the problem than write that comment...
Regardless I look forward to you making this change anyway in like 6 months to a year when you go to support c++20 👍🏻.

from bgfx.