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=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,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 0885E21CDE for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2024 19:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 22379 invoked by uid 550); 21 Apr 2024 17:40:28 -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 22341 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2024 17:40:28 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net; s=s31663417; t=1713721219; x=1714326019; i=nullplan@gmx.net; bh=PB+jQxhcUjrtHBnxs4ArV2551pdfB7ivaAJy0Dewpu8=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To: cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id: mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=H+VS+l1b2cGZ2RjTfDFqk197yvwaCJCSqQhtLLDNAJDIxAP/17cOEae48cqEjiZ6 Z+lhDvriTdIreMYFgx1rT7ABYenkEWoN9loL05mRD75KEQF+JHtn+fyqsZWq41gTL OYGSHD0KMYS1estei85ezxjcYm70qWuBZCuECNHbHiuoVXO2sdM0IdgV8kzvH45hg ObS6E+ZOzZqnPSNGz13WKnDg0bf4+4/+9/qj947zE16MxycodaZv2mrikqk8mZI6l XZcTxXq1SX6e5afUi3GyJok6bZuu3kQzZNegawA4ay2nuzr6XmErKyg2S5kWlDxWK vp5d1bhUQ3McuhqWgA== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 19:40:13 +0200 From: Markus Wichmann To: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: References: <3KDMGHI91MHTL.24XCHF6E4X1XG@mforney.org> <20240421091605.4b4e7d2e@inria.fr> <20240421122358.33440bcb@inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20240421122358.33440bcb@inria.fr> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:eu0ej3heCO8laXzwLV7vXdTNO2cP/0XTg9x4f+zARYRV1tdGJy6 1BuKsezJNmVF6tKza0MxnbU9+nWyNtIoRuOGN+BQb6yfbng6HE0UhHRoGhuscrgjQuA+MLJ 7OFmMy07JSsIlcpr9ccpWemQA3pMr8oSj99YaPunevlidMoRfHbzxQXqUC1Ted2nwEnzBPQ 9BAgyQYiV0c93gBnSN6OA== UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:CVDjypfaFbk=;XZrCkLS0Y1V1d0cSlQ/MGwMV5r7 OgYoDOZ8vIjqP5cHDT/Pb//a2kxsn97uVrpeBar5X8cJXpGa2lOu5cuwBaa6INHLADhe3dXx8 nsAetND7AFHc2JamYirQQfIa1xZd1BAVCp87SVqgBHPK5Ix5PZQKeSRQDc2+tFPmGlbPb0zZd /sASlGxlBHFCObof9WlnX7utoT2ma03FIwIsbNtbP2p21pb6BGhv4ctdz3zN56crznSJ3LLL+ V/78TKSlTGVA/jKLiy8B4Kb9zIuh+aozsicTvn8/JghZHBeplClhVAnim1ij8CR9iAHOanTgt RaRI0RM1x8IMdg/yKsqUGumhLrDiNNSFJd7QHr6R1EyeaJlQNjinXRMAYtxEE8HvLaRp2Dc97 4umwHICa81Y+NwqvfmjBLL35k4ymq/uZhYiegH8rZa0mbKU3Vw9t80BDf52sML/O2+piiyWR/ 9Mwv07DJmEkeUpGUM2NRVDnj3CcEJPEW9mgEpHflKphlim979y1tUiwP9W4q9psL2jfc4p1q5 6f7WCIF6PddlEmhVVwc+tdN7Lxz9R8z+dTQaP21hPKJJfyA7qaO4OsFsfFCR0tdrCE0h3xA3l JpKgMz0xDeUTohEnzSsGElD6th7OwuLAkwCg6pOlVJmkiuXw+8QrKraC8Pgbwn/gTjCQ1w3Zp Ikefq+Z2ANmesCTkVGvW9LVHSIA1SY0RcJoMVjLXnVduJSu05HncsR0Yz+eaEKFpzkHKMQ7kf W+Ogr0f51MmRzr0QB5v78G4fe2BavUkF9ckf4jMtw2yt199K0Ng0IfYMzgFWX1P4mo8HiuuMf iL74DNa9fT1OLE9G/6oxCgevWAWIEt2qPuZuMuw9bwMhw= Subject: Re: [musl] Alignment attribute in headers Am Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 12:23:58PM +0200 schrieb J=E2=82=91=E2=82=99=E2=82= =9B Gustedt: > 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 > > > > > > > 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, Me neither, but I do spend an embarassing amount of time on YouTube. > but I think this is generally used as > figure of speech for "there got reasons to do something". > I have only ever heard this phrase in technical discussions when the pundit had run out of technical arguments. And usually only for personal preferences. I personally also prefer standard solutions over implementation-specific hacks (like the attribute syntax), but I cannot blind myself to the requirements of the implementation. Plus, I dislike conditional inclusion in general, but in this case, we do require all three versions to be present anyway and are merely arguing about precedence. Well, it won't make any difference to a human reader, as they will have to process all seven lines anyway, and the compiler doesn't care for any line except the one that does get included in the end. I would much prefer to dispense with the entire attribute, but that would break ABI. So the least bad form of this very bad code would be my proposal. BTW, in case it got missed earlier: The explicit padding is still necessary for compat with non-GNU pre-C11 compilers! At least the layout will be compatible this way. Ciao, Markus