Hi Joseph,
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 12:04:47PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > > I don't think we should support any of these. We tightened up various
> > > cases of void in parameter lists in C2y (constraint "A parameter
> > > declaration shall n
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > I don't think we should support any of these. We tightened up various
> > cases of void in parameter lists in C2y (constraint "A parameter
> > declaration shall not specify a void type, except for the special case of
> > a single unnamed paramet
Hi Joseph,
On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 09:34:23PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > BTW, I'm wondering about the following:
> >
> > alx@debian:~/tmp$ cat fwd.c
> > void j(void; int x);
> > void k(void; void);
> > void l(void; ...);
> >
Hi Chris,
On Sun, Sep 07, 2025 at 02:38:20PM +0100, Christopher Bazley wrote:
> > alx@debian:~/tmp$ cat fwd.c | nl
> > 1 void f(int n, int n; int n);
> > 2 void g(int n; int n; int n);
> > 3 void h(int n, int m; int n, int m);
> > 4 void i(int n; int m;
On 05/09/2025 11:33, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
Hi Chris,
On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 11:15:26AM +0100, Christopher Bazley wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:57 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
Hi Joseph,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wr
Hi Chris,
On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 11:15:26AM +0100, Christopher Bazley wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:57 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 3
On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 6:57 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Joseph,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to ping ab
On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > I'd like to ping about this thread.
> >
> > As far as I know, nothing has been resolved
Am Mittwoch, dem 03.09.2025 um 22:03 +0200 schrieb Alejandro Colomar:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > I'd like to ping about this thread.
> >
> > As far as I know, no
Hi Joseph,
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:44:28PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > I'd like to ping about this thread.
>
> As far as I know, nothing has been resolved about the semantics (and then
> associated documentation and test
On Wed, 3 Sep 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> I'd like to ping about this thread.
As far as I know, nothing has been resolved about the semantics (and then
associated documentation and testcases) in the case of parameter forward
declarations where multiple declarations for a pa
Hi Joseph,
I'd like to ping about this thread.
Cheers,
Alex
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 12:44:29PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 11:19:39PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > On
Hi Joseph,
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 11:19:39PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:03:00PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > >
> > > > And I'm proposing it
Am Montag, dem 18.08.2025 um 23:19 + schrieb Joseph Myers:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:03:00PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > >
> > > > And I'm proposing it as a GNU ex
On Fri, 15 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:03:00PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> >
> > > And I'm proposing it as a GNU extension, which means we don't even need
> > > to care about what ISO C says abo
Hi Joseph,
On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:03:00PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>
> > And I'm proposing it as a GNU extension, which means we don't even need
> > to care about what ISO C says about [n]. We, as a quality
> > implementation, treat it with s
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> And I'm proposing it as a GNU extension, which means we don't even need
> to care about what ISO C says about [n]. We, as a quality
> implementation, treat it with stronger semantics, which this patch uses.
As a GNU extension, it's also necessary t
Hi Joseph,
On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 06:44:07PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> We'd need standard wording that's gone through several rounds of review in
> WG14 before there's a reasonable basis for reviewing such a patch, given
> how it's based on a very different conceptual model to how array
> p
We'd need standard wording that's gone through several rounds of review in
WG14 before there's a reasonable basis for reviewing such a patch, given
how it's based on a very different conceptual model to how array
parameters are currently handled in the C standard. (And as noted on the
reflecto
Hi!
Here's a patch co-authored by Martin and I. It adds support for array
parameters in _Countof, which will enable writing safer code that only
specifies array bounds in function calls when strictly necessary,
reducing the chances for mistakes.
Here's an example program that never specifies bou
20 matches
Mail list logo
