From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-94446-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 104287 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2018 17:40:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 104270 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jul 2018 17:40:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:589, H*c:HHHHH, H*c:HHHHHHHH
X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 17:40:00 -0000
From: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
CC: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
	<libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 6/8] nptl: Add abilist symbols for C11 threads
In-Reply-To: <5ec19a17-30a3-e9b7-9475-c28b247c8daa@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1807181739140.26553@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <1517591084-11347-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <1517591084-11347-7-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <97b42cb3-e76a-ac71-65cd-c1f6d8c404aa@redhat.com> <90dc04ab-81df-b0d7-a086-d00ea5cc979d@linaro.org>
 <5ec19a17-30a3-e9b7-9475-c28b247c8daa@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="-1152306461-47545298-1531935644=:26553"
X-SW-Source: 2018-07/txt/msg00561.txt.bz2

---1152306461-47545298-1531935644=:26553
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-length: 533

On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Florian Weimer wrote:

> I think ONCE_FLAG_INIT needs to be a compound literal, not an initializer, at
> least that's how I read the standard (“which expands to a value that can be
> used to initialize an object”).

I think it has to be valid as a static initializer.  Which means it can't 
be a compound literal, because standard C doesn't allow those in static 
initializers.  (I read "value" as meaning "expansion of the macro" not 
"value of an object type".)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
---1152306461-47545298-1531935644=:26553--