[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2023 10:40:27 +0100
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@...il.com>
To: libc-coord@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Paul Eggert <eggert@...ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: thread-safe localtime() for an arbitrary timezone
On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 at 20:57, enh <enh@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 10:03 AM enh <enh@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 11:19 AM Paul Eggert <eggert@...ucla.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/14/23 11:06, enh wrote:
>>> > is anyone aware of any standardization work in this area? i know netbsd
>>> > has tzalloc()/localtime_rz()/tzfree() (and tzcode has implementations), but
>>> > they're the only ones who've shipped anything, right? and there's no
>>> > in-progress work on any alternative?
>>>
>>> On my long list of things to do has been to implement the tzcode API in
>>> glibc. Nothing publishable, alas.
>>>
>>> The tzcode API differs slightly from NetBSD's with, as I recall, the
>>> blessing of the NetBSD implementer in question, so I hope it would be a
>>> better point of departure. (Also on my list of things to do is to merge
>>> tzcode's back into NetBSD....)
>>
>>
>> any thoughts on either renaming `struct state` (i went with `struct __timezone_t` to match the typedef to timezone_t for the pointer) or having a knob for that (i added a `#define state __timezone_t` in the `#if NETBSD_INSPIRED` in private.h)? why do i care? because tzcode pulls in the system <time.h>, which is actually fine for the tzcode code, but breaks the OpenBSD wcsftime().
>>
>> (i hope one day to find the time to write a wcsftime()-in-terms-of-strftime() wrapper so i can just delete that, but working on wide character functions no-one uses or should be using is quite hard to motivate. oh, wait... FreeBSD and NetBSD both already went that route. i'll try that, in which case only tzcode itself will need to know that the "real" name of the public `struct __timezone_t` is actually `struct state`...)
>
>
> switching to the FreeBSD "just call the non-wide function" implementation of wcsftime() went well.
>
> writing some basic unit tests for these functions went fine, though it was sad that i couldn't use `std::unique_ptr<timezone_t, decltype(&tzfree)> seoul{tzalloc("Asia/Seoul"), tzfree}` because the size of timezone_t isn't known.
Surely the size of timezone_t is known. It must be for it to be
returned by value from tzalloc and passed by value into tzfree. The
reason you can't use unique_ptr like that is that you've got a type
error. timezone_t is the pointer type, not the "pointee" type, and so
what you have declared there is a unique_ptr that owns a timezone_t*
and tries to pass that to tzfree, which won't compile.
Something like this would work:
static_assert(std::is_pointer_v<timezone_t>);
struct tz_deleter {
using pointer = timezone_t;
void operator()(timezone_t t) const { tzfree(t); }
};
std::unique_ptr<std::remove_pointer_t<timezone_t>, tz_deleter>
seoul(tzalloc("Asia/Seoul"));
> i'd be tempted to further mangle this so i have a public struct containing a large-enough char[], but i worry about just how large to make it to be safe from future tzcode changes. (and on the other hand, do i think that tzalloc() is going to be used frequently enough to warrant the effect? probably not?)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
