From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0F831F8C6 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 17:42:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008A43857C7B for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 17:42:15 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 008A43857C7B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1628185335; bh=8I/fIKbu1Nrvfyajjfkr9AA9ZXmidq8Y6VKNhVGq77g=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=OxburhCAdRAtsnypwZtD5dIxRJsbg7PmhYjFavywVaGoh+lXlt69+AO6RhR/onSE3 my5jqlF5O9YrQv3F+4qSGKd7cWQOmRBd8t4xBSiSmz3hcwvFbkAtSCFX7vhs13FOks NZWTQ0urMqHR+bKFrwRuv9/RgwJ5Mi+UmICW4O0I= Received: from mail-pj1-x102a.google.com (mail-pj1-x102a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A4B53857C6F for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 17:41:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 2A4B53857C6F Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id m10-20020a17090a34cab0290176b52c60ddso11293357pjf.4 for ; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 10:41:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8I/fIKbu1Nrvfyajjfkr9AA9ZXmidq8Y6VKNhVGq77g=; b=QxqgJG8AFDIBKtiqzbad4z5bUwYuAWtJpeY4FU12+cqoYI3CQe5WxPyiw9Moj30XfH ASKTkUieyKctv492Yp30St1TXV/N2dEgd1qjJN2C+g/rZOzL6xCfWMgk6PPi+ZBAllAu TH3r3ktvzLF7bc7cz57I/sJdYBz5InKWZpzxTLdZnMpKNKfPeVgSawH/OrhjB+DGn8Wb gFCuwAtI4bjoPEh6XujHGwVSP8Y34GHvcAc1ozS5bfmWLJpqzqNbdUVeUe9vcdIk+i9X z818OXmLeJAlSoCIQh2BN/gRB7s2x4uy60afnAB7Cv4yN95r+8V7tKN3fHlsB7ckYSax q5xA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531+6k/jyAmjNMP1B3GUpcsriuoBiiCo5MfmsrhrW0/jyCHP/aat U2hl33kJiMkVf5IAKoIHZbx3tvuDs7UpXvhUk6k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzMDooK6ibhOrVQChLY2VqsTp/HWeFGB+M7phfIGYq2UD3+BdlXNBh261ffI3bAoP2W1woE+gASkIwKjCL3YXA= X-Received: by 2002:a65:5083:: with SMTP id r3mr954478pgp.161.1628185314267; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 10:41:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210805131358.300475-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <20210805131358.300475-2-hjl.tools@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 10:41:18 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] : An API for tagged address To: Joseph Myers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: "H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha" Reply-To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Florian Weimer , Szabolcs Nagy , GNU C Library , "Kirill A . Shutemov" Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 10:26 AM Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha wrote: > > > +#ifdef __GNUC__ > > +# if defined __USE_ISOC11 || defined __USE_ISOCXX11 > > +# ifdef __USE_ISOCXX11 > > +# define TAGGED_ADDRESS_ASSERT static_assert > > +# else > > +# define TAGGED_ADDRESS_ASSERT _Static_assert > > +# endif > > These __USE_* conditionals say what library features to enable. > __USE_ISOC11 doesn't imply that C11 language features are available; you > can use -D_ISOC11_SOURCE with a GCC version too old to support > _Static_assert. > > However, you should be able to rely on _Static_assert when building as C > (regardless of feature test macros or compiler versions) because of the > definition in sys/cdefs.h. I can use _Static_assert directly for C. How should I use static_assert for C++? -- H.J.