From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A9783858295
 for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue,  7 Jun 2022 19:46:25 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 7A9783858295
Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id k19so25515753wrd.8
 for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Jun 2022 12:46:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=N77tk9jgZer2lGovwdZ6/uoKvYdlxx+Q8xJAMWOEVDg=;
 b=mQSMj39YYpjP+lChkfEVorCIdYn8t6sxRHa4gpu2DOWcnmPsINpKD7q4YlJGtrwx8o
 wGTz7O70Bvdb6wWHhndzfkfo2irwRRQduxW+qJOOI13JVacRC+Siy6ngg2dXH+qklFDf
 OZaUUnbtNcjaCdZzO21IgG0fBML5l3g3GMD6a3uph6FQ16Q6dkZ8UI+U0chP/pgXlCiq
 9o0kdR7sxBCAt75XEb0xLzzD2ibbqqmyE/vaaaWiSZ8xtapaJ0vJmZwNdp3BPuUUgzZE
 8imaemiMmTR2V//mxqPuAES+/5VFWbJ1GbzGCBf0euB1KZ3170c/4QRUBdyxTKHQd6zZ
 XKlA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532WhuGUJZ2681+8DpMSou0zJAnp3UL9ehtFfqP6s2/7P0qrigAU
 j4QJNBx5/qdv2XQp4qs+pwfwcpB1GxReIPXv3J8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyeEEhsvbwFhhn4wkQ3eDRcBau1Niaj0mQP7m8sGKKulujU+HhPEgSl+dautcNERM1rPIGhINRc43gguP4W3F8=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1847:b0:218:4336:5590 with SMTP id
 c7-20020a056000184700b0021843365590mr11110434wri.511.1654631184160; Tue, 07
 Jun 2022 12:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <jUYpPEW3Y9UZvEp25P0xyzRA4oaGxV_fPv6CkiFVUpCDLJlbKkXRTMeYWvmqSdIfFxO9GQedLgd0GVAikrAlG0yJ8nIl8w9ztCoXfWf2SHs=@protonmail.com>
 <6PeOfngSW_gLKMPtqp7UWs9ZQRv6KpLer221P_B9lNGGC7nJD0p-ta_7b0fwgSdz6cw7UzXsO0OGg0t2UUux81cVfIZkQcbjPwcRHFsNomI=@protonmail.com>
 <Yp5KpUw7ckPJPs2Q@farprobe>
 <hapHPesrXynIutXX68P4QEdXuawT26fUD2ddjC_F7e6E7gCoAP-v5oh3QjWIXciEm8_MJyQBWxMFZGFcqR9uTDVMJQTfOWhyCytjTI6lKXo=@protonmail.com>
 <CAH6eHdTNXafW-sD5KnE9===xQDzsJzO-=KprLmHCUqxdQ=tXNw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH6eHdTNXafW-sD5KnE9===xQDzsJzO-=KprLmHCUqxdQ=tXNw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 20:46:13 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH6eHdSbfYfy73GJ+vNd8VZpqTCXFoXCG9oXun51AEn93ZEyWw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Support for nonzero attribute
To: Miika <nykseli@protonmail.com>
Cc: Ben Boeckel <ben.boeckel@kitware.com>, "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
 SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP,
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc mailing list <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2022 19:46:27 -0000

On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 20:44, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 20:40, Miika via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, June 6th, 2022 at 9:42 PM, Ben Boeckel <ben.boeckel@kitware.com> wrote:
> > > > Based on Jakub's and Yair's comments I created a new attribute "inrange".
> > > > Inrage takes three arguments, pos min and max.
> > > > Pos being the argument position in the function, and min and max defines the
> > > > range of valid integer. Both min and max are inclusive and work with enums.
> > > > Warnings are enabled with the new flag: "-Winrange".
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this something that could be applied to variables or types (I've not
> > > much experience with GCC attribute internal mechanisms, so maybe not)?
> >
> > I took a closer look at it and looks like it can be applied.
> >
> > So trying to compile this:
> > ```
> > typedef int __attribute__((inrange(0, 100))) percentage_t;
> > int main() {
> >         int percentage __attribute__((inrange(0, 100))) = -1;
> >         percentage_t per __attribute__((inrange(0, 100))) = -1;
> > }
> > ```
> >
> > Would print out something like this:
> >
> > foo.c: In function 'main':
> > foo.c:3:59: warning: inrange variable 'percentage' requires integer in rage of 0..100 [-Winrange]
>
> N.B. "rage" should be "range".
>
> From the diagnostic it's not clear to me whether this is an inclusive
> range. Is 0 allowed? Is 100 allowed?
>
> Using [0,100] interval notation would imply both endpoints are valid,
> which I think matches the semantics of your attribute. Is interval
> notation sufficiently widely understood to use here?

Oh, Wikipedia tells me that 0..100 already means that, as an integer interval:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interval_(mathematics)#Integer_intervals

So maybe it's fine as-is (except for the "rage" typo).