------- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com  2008-06-10 11:53 -------
Subject: Re:  Use of the 'nonnull' attribute breaks
 code

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, pgut001 at cs dot auckland dot ac dot nz wrote:

> fully correct code suddenly breaks.  In fact gcc seems to be doing the 
> opposite
> of what ISO WG 14 is proposing for this attribute, which was to add extra
> checking to make sure the attribute isn't NULL.  gcc instead *removes* extra
> checking to make sure the attribute isn't NULL.

If WG14 is proposing incompatible attribute semantics, that's ignoring the 
C1X Charter (N1250) - we agreed at the London meeting that one of the main 
problems with C99 and reasons for it not being widely implemented, that 
should be avoided for C1x, was invention and being incompatible with 
existing practice.  (Some subsequent minutes suggest that the idea has 
since been adopted that C++0x can invent something and then C1x can take 
C++0x as existing practice for C; not a good idea in my view.)

    13. Unlike for C9X, the consensus at the London meeting was that there 
    should be no invention, without exception. Only those features that 
    have a history and are in common use by a commercial implementation 
    should be considered. Also there must be care to standardize these 
    features in a way that would make the Standard and the commercial 
    implementation compatible.

Do you have a reference to the incompatible proposal?  I sent N1259 a 
while back warning about incompatibilities in syntax; perhaps a paper is 
needed on incompatible semantics as well.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36166

Reply via email to