Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #167723

Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler

From Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler
Date 2022-09-14 10:59 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <87k065hm68.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References (11 earlier) <tfanqb$1gk1$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735d380ta.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <tfate1$r6$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87tu5ikivi.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <86tu5am4a9.fsf@linuxsc.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Also, gcc gets away with allowing $ by default;  tcc generally copies
>>> gcc in terms of how a compiler is invoked, so this surprisingly goes
>>> against that.
>>
>> gcc allowing $ in identifiers is a documented extension for most
>> targets, so it doesn't warn about them even with "-pedantic".  One could
>> argue that this isn't necessarily an "extension", since "other
>> implementation-defined characters" are explicitly permitted by C11
>> 6.4.2.1.
>>
>> Interestingly, the C23 draft doesn't have that wording.  Instead, it
>> allows XID_Start and XID_Continue characters, so it expands the set of
>> characters that *all* implementations must support,
>
> I believe that conclusion is not correct.  The C23 draft n3047 says
> this:
>
>     An XID_Start character is an implementation-defined character
>     whose corresponding code point in ISO/IEC 10646 has the
>     XID_Start property.  An XID_Continue character is an
>     implementation-defined character whose corresponding code point
>     in ISO/IEC 10646 has the XID_Continue property.
>
> The presence of the modifying adjective "implementation-defined" in
> both cases surely means, at the very least, that implementations
> are allowed to subset the Unicode-specified XID_Start/XID_Continue
> sets with regard to what characters are allowed in identifiers.

You're right.  I managed to miss the phrase "implementation-defined".

So ISO/IEC 10646 defines which characters have the "XID_Start" property,
but an "XID_Start" character is a member of a C implementation-defined
subset of those characters.  The terminology is a bit confusing, but I'm
not sure how I'd improve it.

>> but doesn't permit '$' (assuming '$' isn't in XID_Start or
>> XID_Continue).
>
> I'm not sure this statement is right either (and agreeing with the
> assumption that '$' is not in XID_Start or XID_Continue).  The
> Unicode reference documentation is so bad that I can't make out
> with any degree of certainty whether it allows various domains to
> extend the XID_Start/XID_Continue sets for the application in
> question.  The presence of "implementation-defined" further muddies
> the waters.  To be clear, neither am I saying that I think the
> statement is wrong;  only that at present there is not enough
> information to be confident of either conclusion.

If '$' can't be an XID_Start or XID_Continue character, then an attempt
to use '$' in an identifier is a syntax error.  I don't see any wiggle
room there.  The open question is whether '$' is, or can be, an
XID_Start or XID_Continue character.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Cake -  C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-08-18 18:44 -0700
  Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@example.invalid> - 2022-09-06 02:48 -0400
    Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-06 10:08 -0700
      Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-09-07 12:27 +0100
        Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 05:45 -0700
          Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 15:35 +0100
            Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 16:38 +0100
              Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:04 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2022-09-07 19:14 +0300
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:31 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 17:40 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 17:49 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 19:27 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 20:02 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-07 21:03 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:52 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 07:14 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-14 10:59 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-15 23:46 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:17 +0200
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 19:58 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 13:26 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-09-07 23:42 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:45 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-09-14 06:40 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 10:28 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-09-07 20:05 +0200
            Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-07 15:28 -0700
              Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 00:51 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 05:20 -0700
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 16:41 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-09-08 16:43 +0000
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2022-09-08 19:23 +0100
                Re: Cake - C23 to C99 transpiler Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2022-09-08 09:59 -0700

csiph-web