From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9326 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2014 14:58:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9265 invoked by uid 48); 21 Feb 2014 14:58:50 -0000 From: "tromey at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/59850] Support sparse-style pointer address spaces (type attributes) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:58:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: tromey at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg02258.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850 --- Comment #20 from Tom Tromey --- (In reply to Josh Triplett from comment #19) > I brought this exact case up on linux-sparse, and Christopher Li's (quite > reasonable) perspective was that it doesn't really make sense to put "force" > on a variable to begin with (as opposed to a function parameter). Given > that, I think one of two behaviors would be reasonable: either prohibit > force entirely on non-parameter variable declarations, or allow it and treat > it much like parameters (ignore extended type differences on assignment). > I'm mildly inclined towards the latter. > > I don't, however, think it's sensible to reproduce sparse's behavior > entirely here, allowing it but not having it take effect. Either prohibit > it or give it a sensible semantic, preferably the latter. Allowing it is definitely simpler to implement. Disallowing it for ordinary declarations would need some research on my part. BTW if you want to try it out I have a branch: https://github.com/tromey/gcc/tree/add-sparse-attributes