Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:49:39 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Re: Best bikeshed ever (feature test macros) On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 07:34:42AM +0200, philomath wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:41:38 -0400 > Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> wrote: > > > > 1. Leaving everything as it is. > > > 2. Making the kitchen sink (_GNU_SOURCE) available by default. > > > 3. Making only some limited subset (e.g. POSIX base) available by > > default. > > The bikeshed should definitely not be colored black. > > I'd lean towards 3, 1 is fine too. but please not 2, musl's > correctness is one of it's unique features... > > Thanks. Thanks for the input. What correctness aspect is important to you? I conceptually like the minimal-by-default namespace, but ISO C does not specify how to invoke the compiler, so even implementations that require you to use obscure options to get a clean plain-C namespace are "correct". In practice, any of the options 1-3 would give the clean namespace as long as -std=c* is used with no feature test macros. With that said, I do tend to agree that option 2 is ugly, mainly since it exposes not just useful modern extensions but all kinds of ugly legacy things, like sys/sysmacros.h junk getting pulled in from standard headers... So far the most reasonable proposals I've seen are along the lines of "XSI plus some extensions" where the latter would correspond to _BSD_SOURCE or some analogue of _SVID_SOURCE (which is not supported by musl at this time). Rich
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.