Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 14 Jun 2003 15:44:48 -0700
From:      David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>
To:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Cc:        arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: unbreaking alloca
Message-ID:  <20030614224448.GA1080@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzp4r2s47zn.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
References:  <xzp1xxw65o7.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030614200407.GA31706@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <xzp4r2s47zn.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> writes:
> > alloca() is, by necessity, a compiler feature.  AFAIK, you
> > shouldn't need to #define alloca __builtin_alloca, since any
> > compiler should be providing it if it is supported at all.  I
> > think simply declaring it should be sufficient; at least this is
> > the case for gcc.
> 
> Not if you build with -fno-builtin or some other option that disables
> builtins.  This is precisely why -CURRENT is currently broken.

Bleh, I apologize.  I was reading:

	-#ifdef __GNUC__
	-#define        alloca(sz)      __builtin_alloca(sz)
	-#else
	-#error FreeBSD alloca support needed for this compiler
	-#endif

as:

	+#ifdef __GNUC__
	+#define        alloca(sz)      __builtin_alloca(sz)
	+#else
	+#error FreeBSD alloca support needed for this compiler
	+#endif

/me crawls back into his cave.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030614224448.GA1080>