On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 12:21:08AM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 12:31:42PM +0000, nia wrote: > > I'd argue that providing alloca(3) as anything except a compiler > > builtin is a bug, and that kind of thing should never be used. > > Well, if you are in strict C/C++ standard mode, alloca should not exist > because it is not part of the standard. If you are in GNU-extended mode, > the builtin logic for it will trigger. Not leaking extra macros has its > advantage.
Would you agree that we shouldn't have a definition for alloca in our headers since it should be handled by the compiler, then?
