Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-15 Thread John McCall
On 10 Mar 2025, at 18:30, Martin Uecker wrote: > Am Montag, dem 10.03.2025 um 16:45 -0400 schrieb John McCall: >>> On 10 Mar 2025, at 15:34, Martin Uecker wrote: >>>>> Am Montag, dem 10.03.2025 um 15:00 -0400 schrieb John McCall: >>>>>>> That said, m

Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-14 Thread John McCall
On 14 Mar 2025, at 15:18, Martin Uecker wrote: Am Freitag, dem 14.03.2025 um 14:42 -0400 schrieb John McCall: On 14 Mar 2025, at 14:13, Martin Uecker wrote: Am Freitag, dem 14.03.2025 um 10:11 -0700 schrieb David Tarditi: Hi Martin, The C design of VLAs misunderstood dependent typing

Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-14 Thread John McCall
On 14 Mar 2025, at 14:13, Martin Uecker wrote: > Am Freitag, dem 14.03.2025 um 10:11 -0700 schrieb David Tarditi: >> Hi Martin, >> >> The C design of VLAs misunderstood dependent typing. > > They probably did not care about theory, but the design is > not inconsistent with theory. This is almost

Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-12 Thread John McCall
On 12 Mar 2025, at 16:02, Bill Wendling wrote: > Qing pointed out in four lines of code how there are two different > token resolution rules being used: one which is reliant upon C's > current scoping rules and the other which requires a completely new > scoping rule. This is no longer a question a

Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-11 Thread John McCall
On 7 Mar 2025, at 19:12, Yeoul Na wrote: > Hi Kees, > >> On Mar 7, 2025, at 1:38 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 04:27:49PM -0800, Yeoul Na wrote: >>> Thanks for writing up the RFC and keeping us in the loop. Are >>> you planning to add “__self.” to GCC's C++ compiler as wel

Re: [RFC] [C]New syntax for the argument of counted_by attribute for C language

2025-03-10 Thread John McCall
On 10 Mar 2025, at 15:34, Martin Uecker wrote: > Am Montag, dem 10.03.2025 um 15:00 -0400 schrieb John McCall: >> That said, my preference is still to just give preference to the field name, >> which sidesteps any need for disambiguation syntax and avoids this whole >> problem

Re: [llvm-dev] [PATCH] Add optional _Float16 support

2021-08-25 Thread John McCall via Gcc-patches
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 8:36 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 10:55 PM John McCall wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 9:40 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:24 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 8:41 AM Joseph Myers &g

Re: [llvm-dev] [PATCH] Add optional _Float16 support

2021-08-23 Thread John McCall via Gcc-patches
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 9:40 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:24 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 8:41 AM Joseph Myers > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 13 Jul 2021, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 8:59 PM Wang, Pengfei < > pengfei.w...@intel.com> w