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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #103562

Re: Using fread function

Show key headers only | View raw

supercat@casperkitty.com writes:
> On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 11:19:16 AM UTC-6, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Are you suggesting that an implementation that doesn't do anything
>> useful with "restrict" should be able to ignore it altogether, so that
>> 
>>     int n = restrict 42;
>> 
>> would be quietly treated as a valid declaration?  Or that an
>> implementation that ignores register should allow the address of a
>> register-qualified object to be taken?
>> 
>> If so, why?
>> 
>> If I write code that uses "register" or "restrict", I want my compiler
>> to check my code for validity, whether they have any semantic impact or
>> not.
>
> If an implementation isn't going to do anything useful with "restrict",
> would it be more useful to have the authors spend a day or more adding
> logic to deal with all the places where the keyword is or is not allowed
> to appear syntactically, or would it be more useful to have the author
> spend a day on some other feature which would improve the behavior of
> programs that can actually run?

Rhetorical questions ignored.

> I would not disagree that--all else being equal--an implementation which
> ensured that "restrict" was only used in spots where it is legal could
> be regarded as being of higher quality than one which will accept it just
> about anywhere, but if in the judgment of the implementer the time that
> would be required to achieve that could be more usefully spent in some
> other fashion, I would not regard the value of having compilers validate
> the usage of "restrict" as being so enormous as to justify overriding the
> implementer's judgment.

That time has already been spent.  All conforming C99 and C11 compilers
recognize the "restrict" keyword and handle it correctly, diagnosing any
uses of it that are syntactically incorrect.  I presume it wasn't at all
difficult.  I oppose fragmenting the language in the manner you
advocate.

[snip]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

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

Thread

Using fread function janus <emekamicro@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 10:07 -0800
  Re: Using fread function "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-01-29 14:31 -0500
    Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-30 08:03 -0800
    Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-01 13:59 -0800
      Re: Using fread function jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-02-05 11:40 -0800
        Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-08 22:04 -0800
          Re: Using fread function jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-02-09 05:39 -0800
            Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-09 07:47 -0800
              Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-02-09 09:19 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-09 09:55 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-02-09 12:10 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-09 13:01 -0800
              Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-12 09:36 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-12 10:52 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-19 21:19 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-20 09:35 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-02-20 09:52 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-20 11:15 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-02-20 11:45 -0800
                Re: Using fread function "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-02-20 15:38 -0500
                Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-23 12:12 -0800
                Re: Using fread function jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-02-24 10:37 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-23 05:04 -0800
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-02-23 07:58 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-25 11:48 -0800
                Re: Using fread function jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-02-25 13:44 -0800
                Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-04-17 13:12 -0700
                Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-04-17 13:50 -0700
            Re: Using fread function Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-02-12 09:31 -0800
  Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-29 13:14 -0800
  Re: Using fread function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-30 08:18 -0800
    Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-30 08:44 -0800
    Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-30 11:58 -0800
      Re: Using fread function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-30 13:05 -0800
        Re: Using fread function supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-30 13:39 -0800
        Re: Using fread function Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-30 13:57 -0800

csiph-web