public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
	"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
	Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>,
	Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] accept all C integer types in function parameters referenced by alloc_align (PR 88363)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 22:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181211225228.GZ21364@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b1b9cf1-9e24-7705-aaa8-83d336a53a75@gmail.com>

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:46:37PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 12/11/18 1:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > Attached is an updated version of the patch that restores
> > > the original behavior for the positional argument validation
> > > (i.e., prior to r266195) for integral types except bool as
> > > discussed.
> > 
> > I thought Jason wanted to also warn for scoped enums in C++.
> 
> I missed that.  It seems needlessly restrictive to me to reject
> the preferred kind of an enum when ordinary enums are accepted.
> Jason, can you confirm that you really want a warning for B
> below when there is none for A (GCC 8 doesn't complain about
> either, Clang complains about both, ICC about neither when
> using alloc_size -- it doesn't understand alloc_align):
> 
>   enum A { /* ... */ };
>   __attribute__ ((alloc_align (1))) void* f (A);
> 
>   enum class B { /* ... */ };
>   __attribute__ ((alloc_align (1))) void* g (B);
> 
> The only use case I can think of for enums is in APIs that try
> to restrict the available choices of alignment to those of
> the enumerators.  In that use case, I would expect it to make
> no difference whether the enum is ordinary or the scoped kind.

The reason was that C++ scoped enumerations don't implicitly convert to
integral types.

Marek

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-11 22:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-10 23:30 Martin Sebor
2018-12-11  7:17 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-11 15:14   ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-11 15:43   ` Marek Polacek
2018-12-11 16:59   ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 18:15     ` Marek Polacek
2018-12-11 19:43       ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 18:16     ` Joseph Myers
2018-12-11 19:46       ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 20:09         ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-11 20:37   ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 20:48     ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-11 22:46       ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 22:52         ` Marek Polacek [this message]
2018-12-11 23:08           ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-11 23:19             ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-18 21:42               ` Martin Sebor
2019-01-03 22:12                 ` PING #2 " Martin Sebor
2019-01-04 20:56                   ` Joseph Myers
2019-01-06 10:27     ` Jakub Jelinek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20181211225228.GZ21364@redhat.com \
    --to=polacek@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=jason@redhat.com \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=msebor@gmail.com \
    --cc=nathan@acm.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).