public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc/doc: list what version each attribute was introduced in
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 17:01:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81cbdb30-0e18-0079-6cad-d781cf332bdf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170706132518.GO3988@redhat.com>

On 07/06/2017 07:25 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> There are several hundred named attribute keys that have been
> introduced over many GCC releases. Applications typically need
> to be compilable with multiple GCC versions, so it is important
> for developers to know when GCC introduced support for each
> attribute.
> 
> This augments the texi docs that list attribute keys with
> a note of what version introduced the feature. The version
> information was obtained through archaeology of the GCC source
> repository release tags, back to gcc-4_0_0-release. For
> attributes added in 4.0.0 or later, an explicit version will
> be noted. Any attribute that predates 4.0.0 will simply note
> that it has existed prior to 4.0.0. It is thought there is
> little need to go further back in time than 4.0.0 since few,
> if any, apps will still be using such old compiler versions.
> 
> Where a named attribute can be used in many contexts (ie the
> 'visibility' attribute can be used for both functions or
> variables), it was assumed that the attribute was supported
> in all use contexts at the same time.
> 
> Future patches that add new attributes to GCC should be
> required to follow this new practice, by documenting the
> version.
Keying on version #s is generally a terrible way to make your code
portable.  It's easy to get wrong and due to backporting there's not
always a strong tie between a version number and the existence of a
particular feature.

It's far better to actually *test* what your particular compiler
compiler supports.  I suspect autoconf, for example, probably has some
infrastructure for testing if specific attributes are supported by the
compiler.

Jeff

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-07 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-06 13:25 Daniel P. Berrange
2017-07-07 17:01 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2017-07-07 19:33   ` Mike Stump
2017-07-10  8:00   ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-07-13 20:25   ` Eric Gallager
2017-07-12 15:24 ` Sandra Loosemore
2017-07-17 17:16 ` Martin Sebor

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=81cbdb30-0e18-0079-6cad-d781cf332bdf@redhat.com \
    --to=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.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).