[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZiTCflgUNfvtT96w@voyager>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 09:38:38 +0200
From: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@....net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Jₑₙₛ Gustedt <jens.gustedt@...ia.fr>
Subject: Re: Alignment attribute in headers
Am Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 09:16:05AM +0200 schrieb Jₑₙₛ Gustedt:
> Since this is unified starting with C23 and I think we morally should
> have C conformance first and fallbacks only if imperatively needed
> I would go for
>
Ugh. Let the bike shedding begin. I will tell you that moral arguments
about software don't make a lot of sense to me, though.
> #if __STDC_VERSION >= 202311L || __cplusplus >= 201100L
> /* use alignas */
> #elif __STDC_VERSION >= 201100L
> /* use _Alignas */
> #elif __GNUC__
> /* use attribute */
> #endif
>
Did you not read the part about the GCC version that claims C11
conformance but doesn't have _Alignas? Yes, that's a bug. Yes, it was
fixed. No, musl can't break compatibility with it.
If not for that, I would have gone with this version too, but that's
like saying "your code would be perfect if it did work".
Ciao,
Markus
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.
