This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: [PATCH] Repair __builtin_setjmp/__builtin_longjmp



> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org 
> [mailto:gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Paul Brook
> Sent: Tuesday, 26 September 2006 10:22 a.m.
> 
> I disagree. A builtin function should either have well 
> defined semantics that 
> we can document and commit to preserving, or should never be 
> used directly.
> 
> This is clearly the latter, and IMHO it's worth enforcing this where 
> practical.  Users can and will abuse any "features" available 
> to them. If we 
> allow the user to call these builtins there should be user visible 
> documentation that says "Don't ever use these".
> 
> >  (c) document briefly how they work in the sources of the compiler
> 
> This sounds to much like an undocumented extension for my 
> liking.  Past 
> experience has shown that these are a bad thing.
> 

For example, http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9539

Danny


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]