public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1•demon.co.uk>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>,
	GIT Mailing-list <git@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] alloc.c: remove alloc_raw_commit_node() function
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:55:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A2B39A.6040902@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140619091924.GA29478@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On 19/06/14 10:19, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:30:50PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> 
>> So, the patch below is a slight variation on the original patch.
>> I'm still slightly concerned about portability, but given that it
>> has been at least a decade since I last used a (pre-ANSI) compiler
>> which had a problem with this ...
> 
> For a while some people were compiling git with pretty antique
> compilers, but I do not know if that is the case any more (Junio noted
> recently that we have had trailing commas on arrays and enums in
> builtin/clean.c for the past year, and nobody has complained).
> 
> Maybe those systems have all died off, or maybe those people only
> upgrade every few years, and we are due for an onslaught of portability
> fixes soon. :)

:-P You never know ...

>> [I have several versions of the C standard that I can use to check
>> up on the legalise, but I'm not sure I can be bothered! ;-) ]
> 
> It was actually pretty easy to find. I only have C99, but "empty macro
> arguments" are listed as one of the changes since C89 in the foreward.

Ah yes, having prompted me to look, it took all of 2 minutes to find it
in the C11 .pdf file I have right here ...

>> diff --git a/alloc.c b/alloc.c
>> index eb22a45..5392d13 100644
>> --- a/alloc.c
>> +++ b/alloc.c
>> @@ -18,9 +18,12 @@
>>  
>>  #define BLOCKING 1024
>>  
>> -#define DEFINE_ALLOCATOR(name, type)				\
>> +#define PUBLIC
>> +#define PRIVATE static
>> +
>> +#define DEFINE_ALLOCATOR(scope, name, type)			\
> 
> I am not sure offhand whether this is more portable or not (it would
> depend on order of macro expansion, and I am not brave enough to read
> through the preprocessor section of the standard carefully).

I suspect it is _slightly_ more portable, but I wouldn't bet any money
on it! I may take a look at the standard (it wouldn't be the first time
I've looked this up), but it would not help in this situation anyway.
The fact that a given compiler does/does-not conform to the standard
is useless knowledge if we need to support them.

>                                                               Quick
> reading online suggests that it's OK, but that an extra level of macro
> expansion would not be. And of course the Internet is never wrong. :)

;-)

> I'm inclined to go with it, and deal with it later if we get a
> portability complaint (at which point we are no worse off than we are
> right now).

Hmm, well my initial reaction was to send the more conservative patch
first. I wasn't so worried about inlining the code from the macro
(I doubt it will change), but I understand (and would often agree with)
your concern.

I would be happy with either solution, so I'll let yourself and Junio
decide! (sloping shoulders, or what. :) ).

ATB,
Ramsay Jones

  reply	other threads:[~2014-06-19 10:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-18 19:52 [PATCH] alloc.c: remove alloc_raw_commit_node() function Ramsay Jones
2014-06-18 20:08 ` Jeff King
2014-06-18 22:30   ` Ramsay Jones
2014-06-19  9:19     ` Jeff King
2014-06-19  9:55       ` Ramsay Jones [this message]
2014-06-19 20:32       ` Junio C Hamano

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=53A2B39A.6040902@ramsay1.demon.co.uk \
    --to=ramsay@ramsay1$(echo .)demon.co.uk \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
    --cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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