Re: [Nasm-devel] clang patches

[<hp...@zy...>]

On October 13, 2016 1:55:04 PM PDT, Daniel Lundqvist <da...@ma...> wrote:
>
>> On 8 Oct 2016, at 06:35, H. Peter Anvin <hp...@zy...> wrote:
>> 
>> On 10/07/16 06:46, Daniel Lundqvist wrote:
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately clang does not realise that 'again' will never be
>false
>>> for non-glibc. How do you want that fixed? Is it OK to just
>>> initialise f to NULL or do you prefer something else?
>>> 
>> 
>> Setting f to NULL is fine.
>> 
>> From fd764d58a7ada29f5121e275ee6b1c050c5f219f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
>2001
>> From: Daniel Lundqvist <da...@ma...>
>> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 15:41:24 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] include/compiler.h: Adapt 'malloc' attributes for
>clang.
>> 
>> As clang does not support alloc_size attribute, don't try to use it.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lundqvist <da...@ma...>
>> 
>> What happens if you do, given that it defined __GNUC__ and therefore
>> claims to be compatible with gcc?
>> 
>> 	-hpa
>
>It gives an 'unknown attribute' warning. IIRC, clang defining __GNUC__
>does not mean 100% compatibility, rather it means gcc-like. I remember
>reading about it, but can't find a source right now. I don't know how
>viable it is to use __has_attribute, at least recent versions of both
>gcc and clang support it.

__has_attribute() sounds promising... do we have a presence test for that?
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.