public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/102397] New: Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax
@ 2021-09-18 11:06 dangelog at gmail dot com
  2021-09-18 15:03 ` [Bug c++/102397] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
  2024-01-19  2:52 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: dangelog at gmail dot com @ 2021-09-18 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102397

            Bug ID: 102397
           Summary: Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss
                    C++11 / C23 attribute syntax
           Product: gcc
           Version: 12.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: dangelog at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Hi,

The available documentation for attributes syntax 

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Attribute-Syntax.html#Attribute-Syntax

does not mention at all the possibility that in C++11 (and, I imagine, in C23)
one can specify any GCC-specific attribute using a [[gnu::attribute]] attribute
specifier, and not only the GCC-specific __attribute__((attribute)) syntax.

I think it would be worth mentioning in there that this is actually OK and
fully supported.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/102397] Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax
  2021-09-18 11:06 [Bug c++/102397] New: Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax dangelog at gmail dot com
@ 2021-09-18 15:03 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
  2024-01-19  2:52 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-09-18 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102397

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2021-09-18
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/102397] Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax
  2021-09-18 11:06 [Bug c++/102397] New: Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax dangelog at gmail dot com
  2021-09-18 15:03 ` [Bug c++/102397] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-01-19  2:52 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: sandra at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-01-19  2:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102397

sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sandra at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I committed a patch a few months ago to say that the new C++/C standard
attribute syntax is supported with a gnu:: prefix, so at least the
originally-reported problem has already been fixed.

However, all the examples still use the old syntax.  Given that there is an
awful lot of legacy code using the old syntax already out there, examples are
useful in helping people grok what it means, but at some point we probably want
to encourage people to use the new syntax in new code for all the usual reasons
why it's better to do things in a standard way, and use it also as the primary
form for documentation.  

OTOH, I don't think we're quite there yet.  Presently the manual describes C23
support as "experimental and incomplete" and says the default C language
dialect is -std=gnu17.  My sense is that it's not appropriate to tell users to
make the switch until GCC's default dialect is advanced to something based on
C23.

So I'm going to leave this issue open for now instead of closing it as fixed,
as a reminder that there is still more work to be done here a little farther
down the road.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-01-19  2:52 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-09-18 11:06 [Bug c++/102397] New: Documentation of attribute syntax does not discuss C++11 / C23 attribute syntax dangelog at gmail dot com
2021-09-18 15:03 ` [Bug c++/102397] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-19  2:52 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).