On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Chris Kennelly wrote: > In terms of relying on the feature: If __memcmpeq is ever exposed as an a > simple alias for memcmp (since the notes mention that it's a valid > implementation), does that open up the possibility of depending on the > bcmp-like behavior that we were trying to escape?
The proposal is as an ABI only (compilers would generate calls to __memcmpeq from boolean uses of memcmp, users wouldn't write calls to __memcmpeq directly, __memcmpeq wouldn't be declared in installed libc headers). If such dependence arises, that would suggest a compiler bug wrongly generating such calls for non-boolean memcmp uses. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
