Re: variadic args (was: [musl] compiling musl on x86_64 linux with pcc)

[Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>]

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:13:16AM +0200, u-igbb@aetey.se wrote:
> > Also, in the time you've spent arguing for supporting something that's
> > obviously broken (using illegal pointer arithmetic to represent
> > variadic args) you could probably have gotten a patch adding
> > __builtin_va_* into tcc, using predefined macros with the current bad
> > definitions if nothing else.
> 
> Sorry, this is an argument which I can not accept (skipping the technical
> statements which I do not agree with but we are not to talk about).
> 
> I am not in a position to fix every compiler I might need, unless I am
> forced to.

And likewise we're not in a position to support interacting with the
compiler-provided stdarg.h from every possible compiler.

Note that this is actually complex in practice (there are lots of
variants!) while the __builtin_va_* stuff is not complex in practice
(tcc is the only example anyone's given where the uniform
__builtin_va_* stuff doesn't work).

Rich