[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:55:07 +0200
From: u-igbb@...ey.se
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: variadic args (was: compiling musl on x86_64 linux
with pcc)
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:40:32AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> compiler-provided stdarg.h from every possible compiler.
>
> Note that this is actually complex in practice (there are lots of
> variants!) while the __builtin_va_* stuff is not complex in practice
> (tcc is the only example anyone's given where the uniform
> __builtin_va_* stuff doesn't work).
Indeed, you actually convinced me that e.g. fulfilling the symbol
visibility constraints (to be fully standard compliant) is not easily
provided with a "simplistic" approach.
So, reasoning in the practical terms, the reliance on builtins is the
best fit for efficient and consistent musl development.
I am otherwise satisfied with workarounds (working and good enough
for my practical needs - the applications usually disregard a lot more
standards than my setup :) for the sometimes "weird" compilers I happen
to deal with, so this issue is in no way a showstopper here.
Thanks for your time in the discussion Rich.
Best regards,
Rune
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.
