[PATCH] Various pages: SYNOPSIS: Use VLA syntax in function parameters

[Martin Uecker]

Am Samstag, den 12.11.2022, 01:09 +0000 schrieb Joseph Myers:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022, Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
> 
> > > Even a compiler extension requires the level of detail of specification 
> > > that you get with a WG14 paper (and the level of work on finding bugs in 
> > > that specification), to avoid the problem we've had before with too many 
> > > features added in GCC 2.x days where a poorly defined feature is "whatever 
> > > the compiler accepts".
> > 
> > I think the effort needed to specify the feature correctly
> > can be minimized by making the first version of the feature
> > as simple as possible.  
> 
> The version of constexpr in the current C2x working draft is more or less 
> as simple as possible.  It also went through lots of revisions to get 
> there.  I'm currently testing an implementation of C2x constexpr for GCC 
> 13, and there are still several issues with the specification I found in 
> the implementation process, beyond those raised in WG14 discussions, for 
> which I'll need to raise NB comments to clarify things.

constexpr had no implementation experience in C at all and
always suspected that C++ experience should somehow count is
not really justified.  

> I think that illustrates that you need the several iterations on the 
> specification process, *and* making it as simple as possible, *and* 
> getting implementation experience, *and* the implementation experience 
> being with a close eye to what it implies for all the details in the 
> specification rather than just getting something vaguely functional but 
> not clearly specified.

I agree. We should work on specification and on prototyping
new features in parallel.

Martin