[Piglit] [PATCH 08/12] util/piglit-vbo: do not use 'and' in a conditional statement

[Emil Velikov]

On 12/08/14 22:21, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/08/14 17:30, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'm not entirely sure how piglit build with gcc as is, yet VC compiler
>>>>> seems very unhappy about this.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf
>>>>
>>>> See 7.9 Alternate spellings <iso646.h>. I guess that gets included by
>>>> gcc somehow.
>>>>
>>> Thank Ilia, we live and we learn :)
>>>
>>> The heading states "Committee Draft — May 6, 2005", so I take that the final
>>> document has (almost) zero changes comparing to this draft ? Or perhaps there
>>> is no official version ?
>>
>> No, I'm just lazy and pick the first link a search engine finds.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_alternative_tokens
>>
>> This thing is quite old -- 1995 amendment to C90.
> 
> Oh, and I didn't notice this was actually a C++ file. In C++ those
> things got an upgrade, they're actually part of the language as
> built-in operators:
> 
> """
> The above mentioned identifiers are operator keywords in the ISO C++
> programming language and do not require the inclusion of a header
> file.
> """
> 
> So it's a bit weird that MSVC doesn't like them... perhaps it doesn't
> like trigraphs either...
> 
>From the wikipedia article:

"""
For consistency, the C++98 standard provides the header <ciso646>. However the
latter file has no effect, being empty.[1] Notwithstanding some compilers,
such as Microsoft Visual C++, do require the header to be included in order to
use these identifiers.
"""

I guess I was kind of asking for it by compiling piglit with the latest and
greatest MSVC :)

Thanks again.
Emil