Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 22:54:21 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r358392 - head/share/man/man9 Message-ID: <CANCZdfq961mA%2B7bRSMexv96oEiYG7yTPS4s=STO3tGWyr9i7aw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5a876bf9-56b5-9465-07f4-2c540313755d@FreeBSD.org> References: <202002271530.01RFUDJA087174@repo.freebsd.org> <5a876bf9-56b5-9465-07f4-2c540313755d@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 9:55 AM John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 2/27/20 7:30 AM, Warner Losh wrote: > > Author: imp > > Date: Thu Feb 27 15:30:13 2020 > > New Revision: 358392 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358392 > > > > Log: > > _Static_assert is to be preferred to CTASSERT. > > > > Document the existing prefernce that _Static_assert be used in > preference to the > > old CTASSERT we used to use for compile time assertions. > > Actually, I think what we want to use is static_assert(). The intention in > userland C is that _Static_assert() is an internal keyword and <assert.h> > adds static_assert() as an alias, similar to <stdalign.h> defining alignas, > etc. I think what we should do for the kernel is have <sys/systm.h> define > map static_assert to _Static_assert and replace existing _Static_assert > usage with the proper spelling. > I originally did just that when people pointed out that there were hundreds of instances in the tree of _Static_assert and less than 10 of static_assert. We could do a sweep and change, but I wanted to document it. Even more so because I was originally mistaken. Warner John Baldwin >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfq961mA%2B7bRSMexv96oEiYG7yTPS4s=STO3tGWyr9i7aw>