From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add internal-only port structure; move iconv descriptors there
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:20:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874nfr3duf.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zjxk57l6.fsf_-_@tines.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Sun, 31 Mar 2013 03:52:53 -0400")
Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:
> I've come to the conclusion that it is not safe to modify 'scm_t_port'
> in 2.0 at all; not even to change the member names. In brief, the
> reason has to do with the C11 standard definition of "compatible types",
> which ties into the strict aliasing rules. Section 6.2.7 of C11 spells
> out what it means for two structures declared in separate translation
> units to be compatible, and among other things their member names must
> be the same.
I can’t imagine how changing the *name* of a member could change
something to the structure’s layout in practice.
I would be in favor of keeping the names ‘internal’ and ‘reserved’ from
your previous patch, but if you’re really convinced that this member
name thing has a practical effect, fine with me.
> Is this a reasonable start? Any suggestions before I proceed?
Looks good to me!
> +#define scm_gc_typed_calloc(t) ((t *) scm_gc_calloc (sizeof (t), #t))
Not really convinced by this, but hey. Ideally, this would need to go
in the manual too.
> +typedef struct scm_t_port_internal
> +{
> + /* input/output iconv conversion descriptors */
> + void *input_cd;
> + void *output_cd;
> +} scm_t_port_internal;
Please define the struct tag and typedef separately. Also, I’d remove
‘_t’ from the struct tag, as discussed before.
Thanks for your patience & thoroughness! :-)
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-31 13:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-24 11:39 always O_BINARY? Andy Wingo
2013-02-24 12:08 ` Neil Jerram
2013-02-24 16:55 ` Mike Gran
2013-02-24 21:17 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-28 3:24 ` Adding new information to scm_t_port (was Re: always O_BINARY?) Mark H Weaver
2013-02-28 8:53 ` Andy Wingo
2013-02-28 11:04 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-02-28 13:09 ` Andy Wingo
2013-03-01 9:03 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-03-05 18:55 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-27 20:00 ` [PATCH] Add private port structure, and move iconv descriptors there Mark H Weaver
2013-03-27 20:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-03-27 20:51 ` Andy Wingo
2013-03-27 21:11 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-31 7:52 ` [PATCH] Add internal-only port structure; " Mark H Weaver
2013-03-31 13:20 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2013-03-31 15:23 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-31 22:06 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-04-01 18:57 ` Andy Wingo
2013-04-01 20:03 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-04-01 20:54 ` Andy Wingo
2013-04-01 21:04 ` Andy Wingo
2013-03-31 19:44 ` [PATCH] Add private port structure, and " Mark H Weaver
2013-03-31 22:08 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-04-01 19:04 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874nfr3duf.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).