a-nogikh wrote: Thank you for the feedback!
* I've sent an email to [email protected]: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2025-November/246931.html * Dropped the `alloc_size`-related changes from the PR: after some more consideration, they didn't seem really necessary and only complicated the changeset. * Added a bullet to ReleaseNotes and extended the documentation for the attribute. *** > Is there a reason why a new attribute name can't be used instead? Like say > `malloc_span` and `alloc_size_span`. This should make easier to keep things > working when trying with say `__has_attribute` and older clang/gcc and you > don't need to hard code the exact version of clang/gcc where the support was > added. I know GCC's malloc attribute added an extra argument which is hard to > test for except via a feature test via an autoconf like but I feel like that > was a mistake [one which we need to live with now] (I didn't think of the > issue back when GCC added that support nor I responded to the review back > then either). If adding a new `malloc_span` attribute will simplify the usage / prevent incompatibilities with GCC, that sounds totally reasonable to me, thanks for the suggestion. I can prepare an alternative PR that will do this instead. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/165433 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
