Re: [PATCH] stdatomic: make atomics compatible with GCC-14

On Jul  9 06:27, Alexey Lapshin wrote:
> > If GCC provides the c_atomic and cxx_atomic extensions, then why can't we use them for this header file?
> 
> To keep code simple. Anyway GCC will go into `#elif __GNUC_PREREQ__(4, 7)` branch

Ok, but given that GCC actually supports the __CLANG_ATOMICS expression,
I wonder if this isn't just a case of a badly named macro?


Corinna