From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa3.mentor.iphmx.com (esa3.mentor.iphmx.com [68.232.137.180]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 309093A73694 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 22:19:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 309093A73694 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codesourcery.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mentor.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,203,1661846400"; d="scan'208";a="85042958" Received: from orw-gwy-02-in.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.167]) by esa3.mentor.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2022 14:19:13 -0800 IronPort-SDR: fwOb3mii5daast5ehwun86Vy9BKypeP/AEc5Q9apK3hb9Lht9Euk049D1l75xxLhTkdSjtv0hn 1aVtIbJV0L1uEApvQpRWQp53Z4iMkxqJuO8exBet3JnMpmpOI3OdYgAxBAu6vcnAbZ+De9Jlrw aFuXdhxsmP+x3Ws2WKt3jzeMn/SVe+TJnyfY8GKkpJWhuQK3CFpSzn1mRreZEIThmDoRoiM+De Q/78hhg8QOTITEpPP3wJrXSCxYTSqOErStzv12G97XojKK3b9FyTzHPazDxJ/ZnDcGI1P5a7SM wOU= Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 22:19:07 +0000 From: Joseph Myers X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk To: Florian Weimer CC: Subject: Re: C2x features status In-Reply-To: <874jvw7rm2.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <874jvx81w2.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <874jvw7rm2.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-13.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.13) To svr-ies-mbx-10.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.10) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3110.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, 21 Oct 2022, Florian Weimer wrote: > > while typeof was enabled by default for -std=gnu* anyway > > in previous releases so is a lower risk. > > Do the semantics of typeof change to align with C++, so that typeof > (int) becomes invalid? No. Both typeof (expr) and typeof (type) are valid. The changes to make typeof (expr) consistently avoid returning a qualified or atomic type when passed an rvalue argument (while preserving qualifiers on lvalues) mostly went into previous releases, but I found and fixed a few more cases when implementing standard typeof (and all those fixes are unconditional). typeof in C2x mode does not treat const or noreturn function attributes as part of the type of a function or function pointer, unlike typeof in previous modes and __typeof even in C2x mode. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com