From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from second.openwall.net (second.openwall.net [193.110.157.125]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F22CF250B2 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2024 12:24:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 27915 invoked by uid 550); 21 Apr 2024 10:24:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 27878 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2024 10:24:08 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=inria.fr; s=dc; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kJIZQpCut49jJyqwEunLBMtk/qv5fv7E9NqHVtpGamw=; b=hdFbx86cZypfNpg/y6ws7KiS2QPbudOOAr1IQkKfhFiLF0nRtjO/r+qO e9qSKH/HppHfyLVc22lQMoTmY1Tu2Y9DD2w7XvUPfVxW3UI9q8Ft6ZY7J taQlrDDCthbUSLn2SroaDIwAU04udhsrjHSTj3BA4DfbTqpHh8oU6dmnx k=; Authentication-Results: mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none; spf=SoftFail smtp.mailfrom=jens.gustedt@inria.fr; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) d=inria.fr X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,218,1708383600"; d="scan'208";a="85336676" Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 12:23:58 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?SuKCkeKCmeKCmw==?= Gustedt To: Markus Wichmann Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20240421122358.33440bcb@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: References: <3KDMGHI91MHTL.24XCHF6E4X1XG@mforney.org> <20240421091605.4b4e7d2e@inria.fr> Organization: inria.fr X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.0.0 (GTK+ 3.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAACRQTFRFERslNjAsLTE9Ok9wUk9TaUs8iWhSrYZkj42Rz6aD3sGZ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [musl] Alignment attribute in headers Markus, on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 09:38:38 +0200 you (Markus Wichmann ) wrote: > Am Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 09:16:05AM +0200 schrieb J=E2=82=91=E2=82=99=E2= =82=9B 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 > > =20 >=20 > 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. I am not a native speaker, but I think this is generally used as figure of speech for "there got reasons to do something". > > #if __STDC_VERSION >=3D 202311L || __cplusplus >=3D 201100L > > /* use alignas */ > > #elif __STDC_VERSION >=3D 201100L > > /* use _Alignas */ > > #elif __GNUC__ > > /* use attribute */ > > #endif > > =20 >=20 > 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. ah, sorry then how about #if __GNUC__ /* or ifdef if preferable for some reason */ /* use gcc attribute */ #elif __STDC_VERSION >=3D 202311L || __cplusplus >=3D 201100L /* use alignas */ #elif __STDC_VERSION >=3D 201100L /* use _Alignas */ #endif Thanks J=E2=82=91=E2=82=99=E2=82=9B --=20 :: ICube :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: deputy director :: :: Universit=C3=A9 de Strasbourg :::::::::::::::::::::: ICPS :: :: INRIA Nancy Grand Est :::::::::::::::::::::::: Camus :: :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: =E2=98=8E +33 368854536 :: :: https://icube-icps.unistra.fr/index.php/Jens_Gustedt ::