From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Documentation bug for __builtin_choose_expr
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jeekimyxko.fsf@sykes.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041122042652.GA26998@mail.shareable.org> (Jamie Lokier's message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:26:52 +0000")
Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> writes:
> The documentation for __builtin_choose_expr says:
>
> -- Built-in Function: TYPE __builtin_choose_expr (CONST_EXP, EXP1, EXP2)
> You can use the built-in function `__builtin_choose_expr' to
> evaluate code depending on the value of a constant expression.
> This built-in function returns EXP1 if CONST_EXP, which is a
> constant expression that must be able to be determined at compile
> time, is nonzero. Otherwise it returns 0.
>
> This built-in function is analogous to the `? :' operator in C,
> except that the expression returned has its type unaltered by
> promotion rules. Also, the built-in function does not evaluate
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the expression that was not chosen. For example, if CONST_EXP
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> evaluates to true, EXP2 is not evaluated even if it has
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> side-effects.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> The way this is written implies that the underscored behaviour is
> different from the `? :' operator in C.
I don't see that. For me the word "also" implies "another analogousness".
IMHO this is fact is worth noting because the usual rules for function
calls in C is to evaluate all its arguments first, whereas this builtin
does not do that even though it uses a function-like notation.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, MaxfeldstraÃe 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-22 10:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-22 8:06 Jamie Lokier
2004-11-22 10:41 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-11-22 10:42 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-11-22 12:21 ` Andreas Schwab [this message]
2004-11-22 14:44 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-11-22 15:02 ` Andreas Schwab
2004-11-22 18:58 ` Robert Dewar
2004-11-22 20:45 ` Kai Henningsen
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=jeekimyxko.fsf@sykes.suse.de \
--to=schwab@suse.de \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jamie@shareable.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).