From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 20 14:58:24 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A2C41065673;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468D28FC1C;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [192.168.61.3])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C43F5C34;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pBKEwM4S078108;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:22 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: "Niall Douglas" <s_sourceforge@nedprod.com>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:34:54 GMT."
	<4EF09D0E.10213.B663FC80@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:22 +0000
Message-ID: <78107.1324393102@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: threads@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:58:24 -0000

In message <4EF09D0E.10213.B663FC80@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>, "Niall Douglas"
 writes:

>There's a LOT of optional stuff in C11.

And then there are non-optional stuff like <nostdreturn.h>, specified
so it leaves no doubt, except as to the sanity of the authors.


As best I can gather, at one point ISO C decided to use

	'_' Uppercase Lowercase+digit+'_'*

for keywords, and that begat us '_Complex', '_Alignas' (a famous greek
poet ?), '_Generic'', and also '_Noreturn'.

Then somebody probably pointed out that

	inline _Noreturn foo(int bar);

just looked plain ugly.

Then some smart person came up with <nostdreturn.h> which shall
contain, exactly and only:

	#define noreturn _Noreturn

So that we can write:

	#include <stdnoreturn.h>

	inline noreturn foo(int bar);


Now, explain to me, why this was more important, and got included,
than being able to say:

	struct foo_protocol_header {
		little_endian uint16_t 	proto_ver	@ 0,
		little_endian uint32_t	seq_no		@ 4,
		little_endian uint32_t	ack_no		@ 10,
		little_endian uint8_t	proto_req	@ 16,
	};

And have the compiler do the error-prone idiot-work for us, no
matter which platform or compiler we use ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.