Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:12:06 -0500 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Subject: Re: svn commit: r228495 - head/sys/sys Message-ID: <20111215191206.GA6569@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20111215144443.GQ1771@hoeg.nl> References: <201112140909.pBE99bS3090646@svn.freebsd.org> <20111214234615.B3839@besplex.bde.org> <20111215122047.GN1771@hoeg.nl> <20111216000117.R2632@besplex.bde.org> <20111215144443.GQ1771@hoeg.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011, Ed Schouten wrote: > Hello Bruce, > > * Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, 20111215 15:12: > > - recently broken for K&R since it now uses signed instead of __signed > > - broken for longer for K&R and C90 since it uses long long. In working > > versions, the __int64_t declarations were hacked for 32-bit machines > > on to make them compile (but not work). Non-hacked versions should > > simply not declare the 64-bit types if the compiler doesn't support > > them. > > Well, the dependency is circular, as <machine/_types.h> depends on > <sys/cdefs.h> as well, so that's not a real solution. > > This is a bit blunt, but maybe we should simply use "unsigned long" > there, under the assumption that on all architectures we support it is > equal in size, and if not likely big enough to store the result. > > > CTASSERT() has regressed for compilers that don't support __COUNTER__, > > since it uses this. Previously: > > - CTASSERT() never worked for K&R compilers, since it uses C90 token pasting > > - CTASSERT() worked for all C90 and later compilers. > > Yes. I am considering merging back the __COUNTER__ fix to FreeBSD 9 > after it has been released, so it shouldn't be too bad. Basically we > have to make a trade-off: > > - Make it possible to use CTASSERT() and _Static_assert() in more places > throughout the tree (headers), or > - support CTASSERT() and _Static_assert() for non-default compilers that > are older than GCC 4.3. > > I suspect that if people switch to non-default compilers to build > FreeBSD sources, they aren't doing it because they want to use an older > version of GCC. It's useful to have standard headers that don't blow up in C90 mode, but my sense is that we ought to be beyond caring about K&R C compilers. (FWIW, my first C compiler was a pre-ANSI compiler from the 80's, and it still supported the features at issue here.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111215191206.GA6569>