Introducing POSIX-friendly type names
Torbjörn Granlund
tg at gmplib.org
Mon May 30 12:42:40 CEST 2022
John Scott <jscott at posteo.net> writes:
GMP currently defines implementation-reserved identifiers all over the
place, which is technically undefined behavior (this is how feature test
macros like _POSIX_C_SOURCE work). In practice, this doesn't appear to
hinder portability, but I'd like to focus on the number one way this
affects applications: the type names.
POSIX states that any system header is allowed to introduce a type
ending in '_t', and as such GMP defining type names ending in '_t' can
lead to name clashes. I wonder if, to accommodate application developers
who want to write conforming POSIX applications, if GMP could introduce
new type names without the _t suffix, perhaps by introducing new type
names with the _t removed?
Sorry, this is a non-starter.
POSIX does not dictate things outside of POSIX.
Besides, I very much doubt that POSIX would add types which clash with
well-established libraries.
Please focus on real problems, not highly hypothetical ones. Life is
difficiult as it is.
--
Torbjörn
Please encrypt, key id 0xC8601622
More information about the gmp-discuss
mailing list