From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L6m4w-0000gp-Vz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:11:15 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L6m4t-0000be-FQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:11:14 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56344 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L6m4t-0000bX-Cb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:11:11 -0500
Received: from relay01.mx.bawue.net ([193.7.176.67]:46479)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <ths@networkno.de>) id 1L6m4s-0000zZ-Tf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:11:11 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 14:11:07 +0100
From: Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add __noreturn function attribute
Message-ID: <20081130131107.GA28482@networkno.de>
References: <492FDA5D.6080602@siemens.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0811282031360.2200@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<493030EA.4040405@web.de> <49326633.9020007@redhat.com>
	<49328833.3000605@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49328833.3000605@web.de>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> Breaking the standard is what brings us the joys of recently (re)posted
> >>> patch for NetBSD and [u]intXX fun.
> >>>     
> >>
> >> I have no problem with calling it 'noreturn' instead.
> >>   
> > 
> > That will break code that wants to use 'noreturn' as a local variable. 
> > I think ATTR_NORETURN, while a lot uglier, is safer.
> 
> Do you have such code already? Is it exported beyond qemu scope? Then
> why not going for our own convention "'noreturn' is reserved as function
> attribute"? (And yes, your macro is ugly :) ).

"Macro names should be in upper case" is also a useful convention.

FWIW, I agree with Stefan, there's currently not much need to isolate
gcc-isms.


Thiemo