Hi Joseph,

Thanks for the feedback.

> Note that -std=c2y -pedantic and -std=gnu2y -pedantic correspond to
what's
> actually in C2y (in the working draft or voted for inclusion into the
> working draft), not simply proposed or having received along-the-lines
> support in a straw poll.

Sorry, it might be that I hadn't made myself sufficiently clear in the
first e-mail. I said:

> Since the proposal has not been accepted or widely discussed yet,
> I would suggest we discuss this in more detail before merging.

I initially ubmitted the patch to start tracking the changes and get
some feedback on the proposal from people with more experience in the
whole standards thing than me. It's my first time trying to write a
proposal and sending code to gcc.

Since I (and perhaps others) would like to see the proposal in action
within an existing compiler to evaluate the ergonomics and edge case
behaviours, I chose to submit the patch to this mailing list. There is
no need to merge it now or even within mildly remote future (i.e., when
this makes to C2y, if ever).

> So any patch proposed before the feature is in C2y should have 0 there,
> not 1, and there should be corresponding tests of how -pedantic and
> -pedantic-errors behave (in addition to such tests in C23 mode).

Could you elaborate on this?

--
With Valediction,
Kamila Szewczyk (https://iczelia.net)

On 1/15/26 11:32 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026, Kamila Szewczyk wrote:
> 
>> +  /* Nonzero for C2y N3792 feature __VA_COUNT__. */
>> +  unsigned char va_count;
> 
> Note that -std=c2y -pedantic and -std=gnu2y -pedantic correspond to what's 
> actually in C2y (in the working draft or voted for inclusion into the 
> working draft), not simply proposed or having received along-the-lines 
> support in a straw poll.
> 
>> +  /* GNUC2Y   */ { 
>> 1,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1 },
> 
>> +  /* STDC2Y   */ { 
>> 1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,1 },
> 
> So any patch proposed before the feature is in C2y should have 0 there, 
> not 1, and there should be corresponding tests of how -pedantic and 
> -pedantic-errors behave (in addition to such tests in C23 mode).
> 

Reply via email to