Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.c > #393336
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) |
| Date | 2025-05-11 19:09 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <87jz6m4m2o.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <vvpmm2$3dhl$1@dont-email.me> <vvpsji$4jht$1@dont-email.me> <vvr5mg$l85c$1@dont-email.me> <87wmam4xa5.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <868qn2zl1m.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> [...]
>>
>>> It's main potential usefulness is not in the definition of the
>>> function, but in calls to the function. If the calls occur in
>>> a different translation unit from the definition, the compiler
>>> does not have the needed information.
>>
>> It does if the visible declaration has the same information.
>
> Like 'restrict', parameter array length information, specified by
> way of 'static', is ignored outside of function definitions. As
> was intended (with 'restrict' also).
I think that by "is ignored", you mean that compilers are not
required to pay attention to it. But in fact both gcc and clang
issue (non-required) warnings in some cases where it's appropriate,
based in information given by "[static N]". "[static 1]" can be
used to require that the argument must be non-null (with UB if the
requirement is violated).
> Furthermore, and also like 'restrict', there is no general
> way to verify at compile time that the stipulated condition
> holds.
Right, but that doesn't prevent implementations from issuing useful
warnings when it can determine that the stipulated condition does not
hold.
> Considering the above, it's better to observe the status quo, and
> leave any diagnostics up to the discretion of the implementation,
> rather than try to retrofit an incompatible change that would
> make an infringement be a constraint violation that can't be
> checked anyway.
Observing the status quo is better than what, exactly?
The status quo is that the "[static N]" syntax has been in the
language since C99, and programmers and implementations are free
to take advantage of it. I don't recall anyone in this thread
proposing a change to that.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-04 07:31 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-04 18:08 +0300
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-05 10:42 +0300
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-10 06:43 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-05-10 15:56 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-05-10 17:48 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-05-11 08:20 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-10 14:29 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-05-11 08:21 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-11 12:02 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2025-05-11 15:30 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-05-11 16:29 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-11 18:49 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 14:41 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-11 17:43 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 15:06 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-11 18:30 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-11 18:15 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 19:09 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 00:16 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 02:23 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 07:19 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-12 15:34 +0100
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 22:42 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-13 07:31 +0100
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-14 21:12 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 09:30 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-13 22:28 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 13:31 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-14 20:44 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-14 21:45 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-12 17:24 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-12 00:07 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 00:43 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 02:27 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-12 17:18 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-12 19:53 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 23:03 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-12 19:04 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-12 17:08 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 13:38 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-13 12:41 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-13 23:16 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-13 14:35 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 15:10 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-13 15:41 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 18:38 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-13 19:37 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-13 23:54 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 21:19 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 21:12 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-13 22:38 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-05-14 03:35 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-13 21:54 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-05-14 06:31 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-06-10 06:01 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-14 13:00 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-14 13:20 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-05-14 23:20 -0400
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-15 11:23 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-11 17:59 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org - 2025-05-12 10:11 +0000
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-12 17:09 +0300
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-11 01:09 +0300
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-11 17:30 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-12 16:18 +0300
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-14 11:09 -0700
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-05-13 15:57 +0200
Re: Loops (was Re: do { quit; } else { }) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 13:52 -0700
csiph-web