From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Wed Dec 27 18:01:57 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96908EA4601 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 18:01:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F6BF6F77A; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 18:01:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id vBRI1mN3061955; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:01:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id vBRI1maU061954; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:01:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201712271801.vBRI1maU061954@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Parsing a comment in stdlib.h In-Reply-To: To: Alan Somers Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:01:48 -0800 (PST) CC: Eitan Adler , FreeBSD Hackers , gwollman@freebsd.org, Benno Rice X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 18:09:56 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 18:01:57 -0000 > I would say that your proposed change makes it less clear. For one thing, > it's not clear whether those three bullet points are meant to be ANDed or > ORed. For another, I'm not sure why you removed the part about "long > long". Finally, s/its/it's/. Frankly, I think the comment can just be s/it's/it is/ Contractons should not be used in manual pages. > shortened to "C99 functions". GCC and Clang both support "long long". Are > there any external compilers that don't? And I agree, that this change is less clear than the already unclear text that is there. > > On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm trying to understand a visibility comment in stdlib.h. Is the > > following change technically correct? > > Can it be made more clear? > > > > Index: include/stdlib.h > > =================================================================== > > --- include/stdlib.h (revision 327228) > > +++ include/stdlib.h (working copy) > > @@ -120,8 +120,10 @@ int wctomb(char *, wchar_t); > > size_t wcstombs(char * __restrict, const wchar_t * __restrict, size_t); > > > > /* > > - * Functions added in C99 which we make conditionally available in the > > - * BSD^C89 namespace if the compiler supports `long long'. > > + * Functions added in C99 which we make available if > > + * - its C99 > > + * - BSD visible and not C89 > > + * - its C++ > > * The #if test is more complicated than it ought to be because > > * __BSD_VISIBLE implies __ISO_C_VISIBLE == 1999 *even if* `long long' > > * is not supported in the compilation environment (which therefore means > > > > > > -- > > Eitan Adler > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org