Am Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 12:06:10PM +0000 schrieb nia: > 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?
What uwe said. I think we should just restrict alloca's prototype to !__STRICT_ANSI__ (at least for the !PCC case). Joerg
