public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>
Cc: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Transform old-style macros to newer "__noreturn" standard.
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 15:25:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4657626B.7010204@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a781481a0705251516l5de0e95ayae45f7a65e25c8cf@mail.gmail.com>

Satyam Sharma wrote:
> 
> But __attribute__((noreturn)) is simply a _function attribute_. Of course,
> it is legal / valid only for functions with return-type void, so it does
> make
> sense to combine both void and __attribute__((noreturn)) in the same
> macro like you say. But that's not syntactically necessary. In fact,
> grepping through the sources, a lot of people do prefer to place the
> attribute _after_ the function declarator.
> 
> Anyway, I'm fine either way.
> 

Sorry to say, but weren't you the person who didn't recognize !! as the
idiomatic booleanizing operator?

I think you need to learn that everything that the compiler accepts
isn't necessarily idiomatic, readable code.  Consider
__attribute__((noreturn)); it's a nonstandard feature implemented using
a generic gcc mechanism -- thus what the compiler will accept is quite
flexible, because it's a generic building block.  It doesn't mean it's a
good idea.

The reason it's often written at the end of the expression mostly has to
do with bugs in some very early versions of gcc.

	-hpa

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-25 22:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-25 18:32 [PATCH] MIPS: Transform old-style macros to newer "__noreturn" standard Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-25 18:40 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-25 19:04   ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-25 19:38     ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-25 21:10       ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-25 21:43         ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-25 22:16           ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-25 22:25             ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2007-05-25 22:35               ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-25 22:46                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-25 22:56                   ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-26 13:33       ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-26 18:10         ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-05-26 23:29           ` H. Peter Anvin

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

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4657626B.7010204@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
    --cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.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