Hi
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Lennart Poettering
<lenn...@poettering.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 15.08.14 13:42, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Lennart Poettering
>> <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 15.08.14 13:00, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> >
>> >> > src/resolve/resolved-dns-stream.c:67:43: error: non-const static data
>> >> > member must be initialized out of line
>> >> > uint8_t buffer[CMSG_SPACE(MAX(sizeof(struct
>> >> > in_pktinfo), sizeof(struct in6_pktinfo)))
>> >> > ^
>> >>
>> >> Ok, this can be fixed by adding "const" to the variables inside the ({
>> >> }) else-clause. But we then end up with:
>> >> error: statement expression not allowed at file scope
>> >
>> > I wonder if there's *any* way how to implement a double-evalutation-free
>> > all-type MAX() on LLVM... That'd be quite a limitation in LLVM...
>>
>> I looked around and it seems like there's nothing we can do. Weird
>> thing is, LLVM allows const-initialization but not member-definition
>> with that macro. I really don't understand why..
>>
>> I somehow think adding MAX_CONST which uses __builtin_constant_p and
>> assert_cc() is the easiest way here. That is, we use MAX_CONST() for
>> all cases where MAX fails. I think this is the easiest way to
>> guarantee no-one else changes the code to use MAX() again.
>> Furthermore, it guarantees that MAX_CONST is *really* called with
>> constant arguments.
>
> If that is what it takes, go ahead.
>
> Let it be known though for all future: I think LLVM is stupid here.
Meh, static_assert() is not allowed there. _Pragma(error) works, but
is always evaluated even with __builtin_choose_expr(). This is all
stupid... That means MAX_CONST really just becomes A>B?A:B.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
