On 06/23/2017 08:46 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This patch adds a variant of __typeof, called __typeof_noqual. As the name
suggests, this variant always drops all qualifiers, not just when the type
is atomic. This was discussed several times in the past, see e.g.
<https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39985>
or
<https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65455>
It's been brought to my attention again here:
<https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg01955.html>
One approach would be to just modify the current __typeof, but that could
cause some incompatibilities, I'm afraid. This is based on rth's earlier
patch: <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00268.html> but I
didn't do the address space-stripping variant __typeof_noas. I also added
a couple of missing things.
I haven't reviewed all the discussions super carefully so I wonder
what alternatives have been considered. For instance, it seems to
me that it should be possible to emulate __typeof_noqual__ by relying
on the atomic built-ins' type-genericity. E.g., like this:
#define __typeof_noqual__(x) \
__typeof__ (__atomic_load_n ((__typeof__ (x)*)0, 0))
Alternatively, adding support for lower-level C-only primitives like
__remove_const and __remove_volatile, to parallel the C++ library
traits, might provide a more general solution and avoid introducing
yet another mechanism for determining the type of an expression to
the languages (C++ already has a few).
+@code{typeof_noqual} behaves the same except that it strips type qualifiers
+such as @code{const} and @code{volatile}, if given an expression. This can
+be useful for certain macros when passed const arguments:
+
+@smallexample
+#define MAX(__x, __y) \
+ (@{ \
+ __typeof_noqual(__x) __ret = __x; \
+ if (__y > __ret) __ret = __y; \
+ __ret; \
+ @})
The example should probably avoid using reserved names (with
leading/double underscores).
Martin
