|
Message-ID: <20150305085823.GX1264@example.net> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 09:58:23 +0100 From: u-wsnj@...ey.se To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: MUSL Feature Detection On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:33:15AM +0100, u-wsnj@...ey.se wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 12:54:58PM -0800, William Ahern wrote: > > So, is there any sort of sanctioned way to detect MUSL at all, version or no > > version? Is there any interest in supporting any kind of feature detection, > > such as an API that communicates implementation choices wrt unspecified and > > undefined behavior. Sorry for having made a too large citation. To be clear, I commented only on the part: > > So, is there any sort of sanctioned way to detect MUSL at all, version or no > > version? [skipping my former message] As for your proposal > > Is there any interest in supporting any kind of feature detection, > > such as an API that communicates implementation choices wrt unspecified and > > undefined behavior. I did not mean to comment on this in the previous message. It looks otherwise reasonable but amounts to a standardization effort for a new API with exactly the details intentionally omitted by the existing standards. This might be hard to accomplish. Rune
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.