Re: attribute: Add note about ongoing standardization of some attributes

2025-01-19 Thread Jₑₙₛ Gustedt
Hello Bruno, (please use this email address, here) On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 10:58:31 +0100, Bruno Haible wrote: > Also noteworthy is that in section 1 of this paper, the motivation > is to make REPRODUCIBLE equivalent to PURE, and UNSEQUENCED > equivalent to CONST, but the proposed changes in section

Re: attribute: Add note about ongoing standardization of some attributes

2025-01-22 Thread Jₑₙₛ Gustedt
Hello Paul, On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:35:38 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2025-01-20 02:55, Jₑₙₛ Gustedt wrote: > > I have difficulties of understanding the usefullness of such an > > interface > > You're better off than I, as I'm still having difficulties know

Re: attribute: Add note about ongoing standardization of some attributes

2025-01-20 Thread Jₑₙₛ Gustedt
Hello Bruno, On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:48:43 +0100, Bruno Haible wrote: > Dear Jₑₙₛ, > > > > By "extension", I assume you mean that [[unsequenced]] is > > > intended to be looser than __attribute__((const)). That is, every > > > const function is unsequenced, but the reverse is not true. This > > >

Re: attribute: Add note about ongoing standardization of some attributes

2025-01-20 Thread Jₑₙₛ Gustedt
Hello Paul, On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 12:42:27 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2025-01-20 07:48, Bruno Haible wrote: > > Why is setjmp an issue here at all? A jmp_buf cannot be used after > > the function that invoked setjmp() has returned. > > True, but nothing in the standard prohibits the jmp_buf