On Wed, 3 May 2017, Alan Somers wrote:

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Bruce Evans <b...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2017, Eric van Gyzen wrote:

On 05/03/2017 14:38, Alan Somers wrote:

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote:

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Alan Somers <asom...@freebsd.org> wrote:

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Ngie Cooper <yaneurab...@gmail.com>
wrote:


On May 3, 2017, at 10:21, Alan Somers <asom...@freebsd.org> wrote:

Author: asomers
Date: Wed May  3 17:21:01 2017
New Revision: 317755
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/317755

Log:
 Various Coverity fixes in ifconfig(8)


...

 * Mark usage() as _Noreturn (1305806, 1305750)


...

-static    void usage(void);
+static    void usage(void) _Noreturn;


Hi Alan,
    Please use __dead2 instead to be consistent with legacy use of
similar gcc attributes.
Thanks,
-Ngie


Why not use _Noreturn?  It's standardized by C11, so tools understand
it better than __dead2.


Tools that can't understand #define __dead2 _Noreturn aren't worth
supporting.

Some tools don't expand preprocessor macros.  Like my editor, for
example, which highlights _Noreturn as a keyword but not __dead2.


Please use _Noreturn, because it's standard.  sys/cdefs.h already
defines it appropriately for C < C11.


_Noreturn is far too hard to use.  The above use of it is a syntax error:

    pts/12:bde@freefall:~/u3> cat z.c
    void foo(void) _Noreturn;
    _Noreturn void foo(void);
    pts/12:bde@freefall:~/u3> cc -std=c11 z.c
    z.c:1:16: error: '_Noreturn' keyword must precede function declarator
    void foo(void) _Noreturn;
                   ^~~~~~~~~
    _Noreturn
    1 error generated.

sys/cdefs.h defines might define it appropropriately for C < C11, but
it defines it as __dead2 for all C, so prevents the C11 _Noreturn
keyword being used.  This normally breaks detection of the syntax error.
Normally <sys/cdefs.h> is included first, so you __dead2 obfuscated by
spelling it _Noreturn instead of C11 _Noreturn.

Defining _Noreturn as __dead2 is wrong because it gives the opposite
syntax error.  __dead2 can now be placed anywhere, but everything in
sys/cdefs.h is supposed to be portable back to gcc-1.  __dead2 must
be placed after the function for gcc-2.0, since __attribute__(()) had
more restrictions then.  So if you write:

   #include <sys/cdefs.h>
   _Noreturn void foo(void);

to satisfy the C11 syntax, then you get a syntax error for old gcc (> 1).

This is just the start of the complications for soft-coded C11'isms.
C11 also has noreturn.  You have to include <stdnoreturn.h> to get that.
But you actiually get the _Noreturn macro which expands to __dead2.

There are further complications for C++11.  sys/cdefs.h does have a
correct-looking ifdef for C+11.  This gives the [[noreturn]] keyward
instead of __dead2.   C11 doesn't have <stdnoreturn.h>.  I think its
keyword must be spelled [[noreturn]].  This spelling is completely
incompatibly with C.

Why do you say that cdefs.h should be compatible with gcc-1?  gcc-2

Because that is what it is for.  It should be compatible with any C
compiler, not just gcc or Standard C ones, but since it grew up with
gcc it doesn't have much support for others.

It still pretends to supports gcc-1 with pre-Standard C (__P(()), etc.)
and even compilers that don't have pre-Standard volatile (pure K&R1
for that and not K&R with gcc-1 extensions), and lint.  Some of this
still works.

was released more than 25 years ago.  gcc-1 isn't the default compiler
for any architecture and isn't available in ports.  If anybody can
find a copy of gcc-1, I doubt that much of our codebase would compile.
It sounds to me that the best practice would be to place both __dead2
and _Noreturn before the function name.

Unportable code can do that.  Of course, it is unportable to include
<sys/cdefs.h> at all.  Usign __dead2 gives undefined behaviour in general.
Even if you include <sys/cdefs.h>, it might not be the FreeBSD one. Using _Noreturn gives undefined behaviour before C11.

Bruce
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to