From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/6237
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_Cegie=C5=82ka?= <daniel.cegielka@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: printf() less __assert_fail()
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 17:13:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPLrYETHF9PBcq9LWkvpHN7JGQ4-3W5o-XdTE4eM+oA0Bei4Eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPLrYEQpeFGnvN63bNv6mSfA1CesbVA-zTOi75mNo_3YwX4pkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141001145424.GM23797@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412176472 13175 80.91.229.3 (1 Oct 2014 15:14:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:14:32 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-6250-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Oct 01 17:14:25 2014
Return-path: <musl-return-6250-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-6250-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1XZLbk-0003OG-Bs
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:14:24 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 1847 invoked by uid 550); 1 Oct 2014 15:14:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 1836 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2014 15:14:23 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=v7jQaF4boj1LLK5XI/B5QB1VFqrMT+sIe4Hg3AUJrBE=;
        b=YVMfWu0kXpMmMCA1sthogl1b51xge7g/PkV541vChjFPNw5Zy23CNJ8pPzEYmBtNtC
         bxichu3K/zwH773YEagGrCK3167+docJ9Fd0QsY2grKx6IMqly/yWyR1KjR8TsKyBRm/
         6IR2pUmLJM+FG4tQmK8Oetp+E/fzalidaY6M9wJD0h4k/m1LLn1Fp6QFAooBTAjQnglP
         Qbn7pJ7Ay9BA3RHlKgFbyjG05Mykz7kg6PMNlLVR7DyK25BO5GhWqtNku+je8KC0d0eO
         rfJD1jHw8oQ8/ljHHMjtB+0WgO8j/wNSSsPHm1R2vo4MoT1QBfL10ZFavKKF/hQsIqd0
         /oJg==
X-Received: by 10.50.61.243 with SMTP id t19mr20524600igr.20.1412176451324;
 Wed, 01 Oct 2014 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20141001145424.GM23797@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:6237
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/6237>

2014-10-01 16:54 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 04:45:44PM +0200, Daniel Cegie=C5=82ka wrote:
>> It makes no sense to use printf() in this function. Is this a good idea?
>
> I'm not sure why it "makes no sense". There are a few minor
> differences in behavior with your version, the main ones I see being
> that yours is non-atomic but async-signal-safe. Are there major
> reasons you want to change it?

Atomic version, yes, I thought about it. It's just an idea. This
version gives a much smaller binary. Similar solutions (WSTR macro)
you use in noxcuse for a small size.

Daniel

> Rich