Sorry, I got very confused trying to read this file. C is a lot different than Java what we learned, and the source I've read here is a lot different from the few examples of C I've read in books.
I must have overlooked this comment but I did see the define for __dead On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 22:16, Crystal Kolipe <[kolip...@exoticsilicon.com](mailto:On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 22:16, Crystal Kolipe <<a href=)> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 04:01:12PM +0000, Lucretia wrote: >> I read the whole file top to bottom, slowly and with care, and saw no >> comments about __dead. Unless by chance they've been added since >> 7.4 release. > > Immediately above where __dead and __pure are defined is the following > comment: > > /* > * GCC1 and some versions of GCC2 declare dead (non-returning) and > * pure (no side effects) functions using "volatile" and "const"; > * unfortunately, these then cause warnings under "-ansi -pedantic". > * GCC >= 2.5 uses the __attribute__((attrs)) style. All of these > * work for GNU C++ (modulo a slight glitch in the C++ grammar in > * the distribution version of 2.5.5). > */ > > This, with a few updates and changes, has been in the source code > for > 30 years. > > For reference, the same comment in the same file in the NetBSD tree > is a bit more verbose and gives some examples of what pure and const > are used for.
