Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 13:30:03 -0700 From: Bakul Shah <bakul@iitbombay.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Minimum gcc and clang supported to generate FreeBSD binaries Message-ID: <AA45B1CB-0F82-4162-A357-FD87F6221505@iitbombay.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfp1GEM%2Bxh5nEh8%2BDzXKeuyGi22a1vpfod05866vtXLSgQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANCZdfqBdsoNf8tVwX6MH=Dd24e114b_Pn5hA5UjxtSBX-h%2BGA@mail.gmail.com> <197A5386-1096-4754-BA82-996140B56EAF@iitbombay.org> <ZnO0Rs1f0CQ_Y3Yh@kib.kiev.ua> <CANCZdfpgLe3e34ovoUuT3xwJJ0FG32PTJddiLaC0xgMteH-nBA@mail.gmail.com> <EF5DFA8F-195B-4B5C-9F4B-5A39B831E9C2@iitbombay.org> <CANCZdfr0CjB65oJQtJtz=BAkCWmT0YrTUyK1eMM4GVVum5GUdQ@mail.gmail.com> <F6667935-10A0-4196-8223-FD34DD3C74E2@iitbombay.org> <CANCZdfp1GEM%2Bxh5nEh8%2BDzXKeuyGi22a1vpfod05866vtXLSgQ@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Jun 20, 2024, at 12:00 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024, 11:43 AM Bakul Shah <bakul@iitbombay.org <mailto:bakul@iitbombay.org>> wrote: >> On Jun 19, 2024, at 11:49 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com <mailto:imp@bsdimp.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Yea. We shouldn't. But it's kinda necessary to have the compilers tested all the time to spot regressions. This stuff is fiddly enough with 2 main compiles and 2 that kinda emulate these two... comes a point that you need to say enough unless somebody is really, actively using it, our kinda support becomes the worst of both worlds: a random drag on development that isn't actually useful to anybody. >> >> You should'n't have to test with every compiler if the libraries and headers are standard compliant (by default). > > > Except things don't work that way. They are standard compliant (which standard do you want?). The standard is the BSD API. In that API, we have two versions of qsort_r: The old, pre-standard and the new standardized version (at least for the moment). You can say you want a different standard, (see _POSIX_C_SOURCE or _XOPEN_SOURCE), but that's on you. I only meant standard compliant in the sense that a compiler that conforms to C/C++ language standard in existence for 10 year or so old should accept it. Who even depends on the old qsort_r? Why can't the fix be in a qsort specific area bracketed by some backward compatibility flag? Anyway I will drop this until (& if) I can come up with a cleaner solution. Thanks for your patience! [-- Attachment #2 --] <html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">On Jun 20, 2024, at 12:00 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:<br><div><blockquote type="cite"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><meta charset="UTF-8"><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Jun 20, 2024, 11:43 AM Bakul Shah <<a href="mailto:bakul@iitbombay.org" target="_blank">bakul@iitbombay.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">On Jun 19, 2024, at 11:49 PM, Warner Losh <<a href="mailto:imp@bsdimp.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">imp@bsdimp.com</a>> wrote:<br>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>> Yea. We shouldn't. But it's kinda necessary to have the compilers tested all the time to spot regressions. This stuff is fiddly enough with 2 main compiles and 2 that kinda emulate these two... comes a point that you need to say enough unless somebody is really, actively using it, our kinda support becomes the worst of both worlds: a random drag on development that isn't actually useful to anybody.</blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><br>You should'n't have to test with every compiler if the libraries and headers are standard compliant (by default).<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><br></div><div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Except things don't work that way. They are standard compliant (which standard do you want?). The standard is the BSD API. In that API, we have two versions of qsort_r: The old, pre-standard and the new standardized version (at least for the moment). You can say you want a different standard, (see _POSIX_C_SOURCE or _XOPEN_SOURCE), but that's on you.</div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>I only meant standard compliant in the sense that a compiler that conforms to C/C++ language standard in existence for 10 year or so old should accept it. </div><div><br></div><div>Who even depends on the old qsort_r? Why can't the fix be in a qsort specific area bracketed by some backward compatibility flag? Anyway I will drop this until (& if) I can come up with a cleaner solution.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for your patience!</div><br></body></html>help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AA45B1CB-0F82-4162-A357-FD87F6221505>