[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 20:42:45 -0400
From: Daniel Sabogal <dsabogalcc@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add missing *_unlocked and wcsftime_l prototypes
to wchar.h
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 05:09:39PM -0400, Daniel Sabogal wrote:
>> these functions had been implemented, but prototypes were not made available
>> ---
>> include/wchar.h | 12 ++++++++++++
>> src/stdio/getwchar.c | 2 --
>> src/stdio/getwchar_unlocked.c | 8 ++++++++
>> src/stdio/putwchar.c | 2 --
>> src/stdio/putwchar_unlocked.c | 8 ++++++++
>> 5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 src/stdio/getwchar_unlocked.c
>> create mode 100644 src/stdio/putwchar_unlocked.c
>>
>> diff --git a/include/wchar.h b/include/wchar.h
>> index 0167dce..58818f6 100644
>> --- a/include/wchar.h
>> +++ b/include/wchar.h
>> @@ -136,6 +136,18 @@ size_t wcsftime (wchar_t *__restrict, size_t, const wchar_t *__restrict, const s
>>
>> #undef iswdigit
>>
>> +#if defined(_GNU_SOURCE)
>> +wint_t fgetwc_unlocked (FILE *);
>> +wint_t getwc_unlocked (FILE *);
>> +wint_t getwchar_unlocked (void);
>> +wint_t fputwc_unlocked (wchar_t, FILE *);
>> +wint_t putwc_unlocked (wchar_t, FILE *);
>> +wint_t putwchar_unlocked (wchar_t);
>> +wchar_t *fgetws_unlocked (wchar_t *__restrict, int, FILE *__restrict);
>> +int fputws_unlocked (const wchar_t *__restrict, FILE *__restrict);
>> +size_t wcsftime_l (wchar_t *__restrict, size_t, const wchar_t *__restrict, const struct tm *__restrict, locale_t);
>> +#endif
>
> I suspect BSDs also had these so they should possibly be exposed under
> _GNU_SOURCE || _BSD_SOURCE. Thoughts?
Glibc doesn't provide any of these with _BSD_SOURCE.
FreeBSD and NetBSD provide wcsftime_l, but doesn't seem to have the
*_unlocked variants.
OpenBSD doesn't seem to provide either.
Perhaps wcsftime_l should be moved under _GNU_SOURCE || _BSD_SOURCE.
>> diff --git a/src/stdio/getwchar.c b/src/stdio/getwchar.c
>> index bd89e0e..77a9dc1 100644
>> --- a/src/stdio/getwchar.c
>> +++ b/src/stdio/getwchar.c
>> @@ -5,5 +5,3 @@ wint_t getwchar(void)
>> {
>> return fgetwc(stdin);
>> }
>> -
>> -weak_alias(getwchar, getwchar_unlocked);
>> diff --git a/src/stdio/getwchar_unlocked.c b/src/stdio/getwchar_unlocked.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..1d00567
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/src/stdio/getwchar_unlocked.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
>> +#define _GNU_SOURCE
>> +#include "stdio_impl.h"
>> +#include <wchar.h>
>> +
>> +wint_t getwchar_unlocked(void)
>> +{
>> + return fgetwc_unlocked(stdin);
>> +}
>
> What is the motivation for replacing the aliases with wrappers? This
> does not seem like an improvement.
>
> Rich
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by using weak_alias(getwchar, getwchar_unlocked)
instead of the wrapper, wouldn't calls to getwchar_unlocked() really just invoke
getwchar() or fgetwc(stdin) instead of the intended fgetwc_unlocked(stdin)?
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.
