Hi Paul, On 2026-02-20T16:31:44-0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 2026-02-20 16:04, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > > BTW, the it doesn't really need __STDC_VERSION__ >= 202311L. This works > > all the way back to C11, AFAIK. > > Gnulib doesn't assume C11; it assumes only C99. We may start assuming a > later C at some point but now is not a good time.
Yup, I didn't mean we don't need any cpp(1) check, but that we don't need C23. We could put a C11 test. > > > However, shouldn't that be done in a separate patch? > > Not quite following, but if you mean this sort of thing affects existing > functions other than the proposed strnul, then yes that patch should be done > first. As Bruno notes, though, it's not clear what those other functions > would be, as we should leave strchr etc. alone. Okay. And if we don't make strchr(3) etc. const-generic, do you want to make strnul() const-generic? I'm not sure; on the one hand, it would be useful; on the other, it might be confusing why gnulib provides such APIs for some functions but not for others. In any case, it's up to you. If you prefer it const-generic, I think it would be easier if you write the patch; you know what you can and can't use within gnulib, so you'll do it faster. Cheers, Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
