[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120906031236.GZ27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 23:12:36 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] Add _Noreturn specifier to functions
specified as such by ISO C11
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 08:02:35PM +0200, philomath wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is an updated version, addressing the issues rich mentioned.
>
> Should I add _Noreturn to other functions too (such as the various a_crash
> versions, *err*, etc)?
I don't really care about the err.h functions; these are legacy junk
and should not be used in modern programs. I'm pretty much indifferent
to whether they get _Noreturn, but if so, let's save it for a separate
patch/commit.
As for a_crash, I'd like having it there in principle, but I don't
like duplicating the #if logic in each platform's atomic.h. Since this
code is internal and already depends on __asm__, it probably would not
hurt to just use __attribute__((__noreturn__)), perhaps with #ifdef
__GNUC__ around it. It's the public headers that need to be compatible
with an arbitrary C99/C11 compiler; the internals of musl depend on
"minimal GNU C" in the form of inline asm and some related things.
This can also be a separate patch/commit since it's unrelated to
making the headers conform to C11.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
