From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE1820951 for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:15:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751135AbdCOAPn (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 20:15:43 -0400 Received: from avasout04.plus.net ([212.159.14.19]:52086 "EHLO avasout04.plus.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751009AbdCOAPm (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 20:15:42 -0400 Received: from [10.0.2.15] ([146.90.175.94]) by avasout04 with smtp id w0Ff1u00222aPyA010Fg6a; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:15:40 +0000 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=Groywg9C c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=c4JbszTospdBBUsinAk+iw==:117 a=c4JbszTospdBBUsinAk+iw==:17 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=iKrn8l-KAAAA:8 a=ReYs8vE-k4mOGKPJbSwA:9 a=7Zwj6sZBwVKJAoWSPKxL6X1jA+E=:19 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=vz8bQswTWcriz0i0jksL:22 X-AUTH: ramsayjones@:2500 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Move SHA-1 implementation selection into a header file To: "brian m. carlson" , Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org References: <20170311222818.518541-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20170314184126.GJ26789@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20170314201424.vccij5z2ortq4a4o@sigill.intra.peff.net> <1fce97df-7eb8-79d5-b96b-2086746bf19d@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20170314234659.wamzgpqu2aikghci@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> From: Ramsay Jones Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:15:39 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170314234659.wamzgpqu2aikghci@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 14/03/17 23:46, brian m. carlson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:42:20PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote: >> >> >> On 14/03/17 20:44, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> OK, then I'll queue this. The selection still goes to BASIC_CFLAGS >>> so the dependencies for re-compilation should be right, I'd think. >>> >>> -- >8 -- >>> From: "brian m. carlson" >>> Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 22:28:18 +0000 >>> Subject: [PATCH] hash.h: move SHA-1 implementation selection into a header file >>> >>> Many developers use functionality in their editors that allows for quick >>> syntax checks, including warning about questionable constructs. This >>> functionality allows rapid development with fewer errors. However, such >>> functionality generally does not allow the specification of >>> project-specific defines or command-line options. >>> >>> Since the SHA1_HEADER include is not defined in such a case, developers >>> see spurious errors when using these tools. Furthermore, while using a >>> macro as the argument to #include is permitted by C11, it isn't >>> permitted by C89 and C99, and there are known implementations which >>> reject it. >> >> C99 certainly allows a macro argument to #include (see, 6.10.2-4; there >> is also an example in 6.10.2-8). >> >> I can't remember if it's allowed in C89/C90 (I think it is). I only >> have immediate access to the C99 and C11 standards (and I can't be >> bothered to search), so I can't say for sure. > > You're right. I only have access to N1124 (the C99 final draft), but it > does allow that. I could have sworn it was new in C11. I'm pretty > certain it isn't allowed in C89, but I don't have access to that > standard. My copies of Harbison and Steele (Third and Fifth editions) claim that Standard C supports it also (by which they mean C89/C90). > I know there have been reasonably standards-conforming compilers that > have rejected it in the past, but I can't remember which ones (I think > they were for proprietary Unices). Yes, I think that happened to me on Irix, if I recall correctly. > Junio, do you want to amend the commit message before you merge it? Yes, please! ;-) ATB, Ramsay Jones