On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 10:13 PM Martin Uecker <uec...@tugraz.at> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, dem 25.03.2025 um 19:09 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:04 PM Martin Uecker <uec...@tugraz.at> wrote:
> > >
>
> >
> > It seems clear that using "__self" is most likely going to be part of
> > any solution we come up with. What we need to avoid is feature skew
> > between GCC and Clang. It'll revert projects back into the "compiler
> > war" days, which isn't beneficial to anyone. Is there a compromise
> > that's acceptable for both GCC and Clang beyond adding "__self", but
> > not requiring it?
>
> Having the syntax but not requiring it does not solve the problem,
> because it would still require compilers to implement late parsing
> (a problem for many C compilers).
>
> If we require __self__ now, this would allow us to move on while
> leaving the door open to finding consensus later, e.g. after WG14
> has considered it in the next meeting.
>
Do you have any thoughts, good or bad, on having a forward reference
in the attribute? Something like:
struct foo {
int *buf __counted_by(short len; len); // refers to 'len' below
short len;
};
-bw
