Re: n3294 - The restrict function attribute as a replacement of the restrict qualifier

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 2024-07-26T16:24:14+0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> I know that "noalias" was included in some C89 drafts but removed from
> the final standard after objections.  Maybe someone who was around
> then could explain what "noalias" was, what the problems with it were

For this part, I think the source most often cited is Dennis Ritchie's
thunderbolt aimed directly at "noalias".

https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/dmr-on-noalias.html

> and how it differs from "restrict",

I can only disqualify myself as an authority here.

> To comprehensively address this demands so we can make sure that any
> new proposals in this area don't suffer from whatever the perceived
> deficiencies of "noalias" were?

I think it would be valuable to get such a discussion into the rationale
of the next C standard.

Regards,
Branden

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux