Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 09:42:52 -0400 From: Morten Welinder <mwelinder@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: C11 threads > the musl math library currently defines distinct long double [...] You cannot compare a "double" function pointer to a "long double" function pointer. The types are incompatible, even if they have the same representation. Hence I don't believe a C program can even tell if they are the same. M. On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote: > * Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@...ia.fr> [2014-07-25 13:06:44 +0200]: >> Am Freitag, den 25.07.2014, 12:40 +0200 schrieb Szabolcs Nagy: >> > * Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@...ia.fr> [2014-07-25 12:00:37 +0200]: >> > > /* Best of all worlds, these are just weak aliases */ >> > > int cnd_broadcast(cnd_t *); // pthread_cond_broadcast >> > >> > posix is not yet aligned with c11, but i think they will >> > require inequal function pointers for these functions >> >> The term "inequal function pointer" had nothing pop up. Could you give >> a reference to the relevant part in POSIX that makes the requirement >> for a "strong" symbol? > > > hm i might be wrong: > > there is a requirement in c and posix that the address of a > standard function can be taken and that == is only true for > function pointers if they point to the same function > > but i don't see any requirement that each library function > must be distinct > > and there is a dr that implies the opposite: > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_078.html > > without explanation the response says h can return 0. > > the musl math library currently defines distinct long double > functions even if long double and double have the same > representation, they could be weak aliases if the standard > allows this..
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.