Hi Paul, On 2026-02-14T12:12:02-0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2026-02-14 11:20, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > we can't allow that, because that would require path analysis > > Then that's a fatal objection to the change proposed in alx-0087r5.
Then that'd be a fatal objection to the mere existence of the attribute. It's more or less comparable to not being able to convert T** to const T**. It's a corner case that might be safe in some cases, but which we can't allow for safety reasons. A programmer might be in a better place to override the compiler (or maybe the compiler could allow it as QoI, if it's smart enough). > There's no such requirement for [[noreturn]] in C23, and for good reason. > Why should there be such a requirement for [[reproducible]]? Indeed, there's discussion on [[noreturn]] going on at the moment, both in WG14 and WG21. Don't consider any existing standard attributes to be settled or good. Cheers, Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
