This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: What needs to be satisfied to become a type qualifier in standard?
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Akshat Garg <xkspr7 at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:37:35 +0000
- Subject: Re: What needs to be satisfied to become a type qualifier in standard?
- Ironport-sdr: nGfPTD2hz8LMqN0MnKTzwIKQ4FACj3n2iJCYZ09CHbSWSlUv+Lcq0lp0Cauk/eI5SYziuebKn9 TdXzAQ2+/bEV9OaVJ5Xia84jHGBK/nykxiJZeA1REQyDVkn1HDV0Gu7suxPH3O0py9A+N5DOcs EPips/Kcz5I7q8IU2BqJRgDl0oYvbnsuGR/Ppk4wEVBjVKXM5qQKvpi+Z6n/Tll6/neFjq1QcB jFuhNU03nwpPuPuLtKLpPdel+dmNVa46Nk9rn+UE9IVZwWMjT9uzN9FLISx6aEPbkiKhs1iY0m fYM=
- Ironport-sdr: WIIjHQQ4tsqFzkLXX0EIpXXyJ2j2LUU8SXfRAbQsGpO6xvFQ8UCUUYkEpR/bXvDq3iNAE8LDe/ 1OtkDHVSmPcQ==
- References: <CAMEQ7YxE1-viEaojn794XKbtkPgbuA18qii2qjMPWM5fbH-szQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020, Akshat Garg wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I am trying to see how a new type qualifier only for pointer variables is
> suitable to be in standard semantically. I have this thread (
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-08/msg02015.html ) where Joseph
> discussed a bit about what a new type qualifier should satisfy. Can
> somebody help me to know the full list of existing logic that needs to be
> satisfied for a new type qualifier.
> Is going with this doc (
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1548.pdf ), in section
> 6.7.3, sufficient?
No. You should look at all the places, throughout clause 6, that refer to
such things as "qualified or unqualified type", or to a qualified or
unqualified version of a given type. It's not the subclause specifically
about qualifiers that's the concern so much as all the places involving
qualifiers all over the rest of the standard.
Joseph S. Myers