fix: batch shading compiler directives were wrong #2015
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I spotted two places where we used a *nonexistant* OSL_GCCVERSION macro. This is never defined. In platform.h, I think it's a simple typo and should be OSL_GNUC_VERSION, which is the macro we actually use to hold the GCC version, or 0 if it's not being compiled by GCC. In wide_opcolor.cpp, it's odder and seems like also a cut-and-paste error. At the very least it should be OSL_CLANG_VERSION since it's part of a clause that also tests that clang < 14.0. But upon staring at it, I can't help but wonder if this spot should *also* have a clause `OSL_GNUC_VERSION ||` to make this simd loop macro work properly for GCC, as it did in the other one in platform.h? And should the one in platform.h include clang, or no? Signed-off-by: Larry Gritz <[email protected]>
Collaborator
Author
|
@AlexMWells This look right to you? |
Collaborator
Author
|
This has been sitting around for a while. Any comments? @AlexMWells? |
AlexMWells
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2025
Contributor
AlexMWells
left a comment
AlexMWells
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM,
although we might want a todo to try different clang versions to see if at some version the WIDE_TRANSFORMC_OMP_SIMD_LOOP can be re-enabled.
lgritz
added
the
build / testing / port / CI
lgritz
added a commit
to lgritz/OpenShadingLanguage
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
…ndation#2015) I spotted two places where we used a *nonexistant* OSL_GCCVERSION macro. This is never defined. In platform.h, I think it's a simple typo and should be OSL_GNUC_VERSION, which is the macro we actually use to hold the GCC version, or 0 if it's not being compiled by GCC. In wide_opcolor.cpp, it's odder and seems like also a cut-and-paste error. At the very least it should be OSL_CLANG_VERSION since it's part of a clause that also tests that clang < 14.0. But upon staring at it, I can't help but wonder if this spot should *also* have a clause `OSL_GNUC_VERSION ||` to make this simd loop macro work properly for GCC, as it did in the other one in platform.h? And should the one in platform.h include clang, or no? Signed-off-by: Larry Gritz <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I spotted two places where we used a nonexistent
OSL_GCCVERSIONmacro. This is never defined.In platform.h, I think it's a simple typo and should be
OSL_GNUC_VERSION, which is the macro we actually use to hold the GCC version, or 0 if it's not being compiled by GCC.In wide_opcolor.cpp, it's odder and seems like also a cut-and-paste error. At the very least it should be
OSL_CLANG_VERSIONsince it's part of a clause that also tests that clang < 14.0.