Well... What exactly is still under discussion? In my perspective, the main pitfalls have been resolved:
0. All possible places where TFR() macro could be applied are covered. 1. Macro has been renamed in order to be more transparent. The name has been chosen in comparison with a similar glibc macro. 2. The macro itself has been refactored, in order to replace it entirely with glibc alternative. 3. Problems with statement/expressions differences in qemu and glibc implementation have been resolved. Is there any room for improvement? On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 5:17 PM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 at 15:06, Nikita Ivanov <niva...@cloudlinux.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi! Are there any updates? I have not received any comments since the > last email. > > Looking at the thread, I don't think we (yet) have consensus on the > right thing to do here... > > thanks > -- PMM > -- Best Regards, *Nikita Ivanov* | C developer *Telephone:* +79140870696 *Telephone:* +79015053149
