From 9cbe8311fcf641a7567bc0855566620477861518 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Austin Clements Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 13:57:29 +2000 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH 4/4] Explicitly type void* pointers --- e9/5d98dd2b915f39bcb5253ce3f40761942ace59 | 150 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 150 insertions(+) create mode 100644 e9/5d98dd2b915f39bcb5253ce3f40761942ace59 diff --git a/e9/5d98dd2b915f39bcb5253ce3f40761942ace59 b/e9/5d98dd2b915f39bcb5253ce3f40761942ace59 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f6b6ecdb8 --- /dev/null +++ b/e9/5d98dd2b915f39bcb5253ce3f40761942ace59 @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1C3431FAF + for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:57:34 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.7 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id NNtKva1dsRw4 for ; + Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:57:33 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-4.MIT.EDU + [18.9.25.15]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE23431FAE + for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:57:33 -0700 (PDT) +X-AuditID: 1209190f-b7f8a6d000000914-b8-4f87178ca6c5 +Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) + by dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP + id 38.BF.02324.C87178F4; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:57:32 -0400 (EDT) +Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) + by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id q3CHvVtR014123; + Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:57:32 -0400 +Received: from awakening.csail.mit.edu (awakening.csail.mit.edu [18.26.4.91]) + (authenticated bits=0) + (User authenticated as amdragon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) + by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id q3CHvUJm010169 + (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); + Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:57:31 -0400 (EDT) +Received: from amthrax by awakening.csail.mit.edu with local (Exim 4.77) + (envelope-from ) + id 1SIOGv-0004T4-V9; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:57:30 -0400 +Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:57:29 -0400 +From: Austin Clements +To: Jani Nikula +Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Explicitly type void* pointers +Message-ID: <20120412175729.GH13549@mit.edu> +References: <1333966665-10469-1-git-send-email-Vladimir.Marek@oracle.com> + <1333966665-10469-5-git-send-email-Vladimir.Marek@oracle.com> + + <20120409181543.GC10554@pub.czech.sun.com> + <87mx6ka8y1.fsf@nikula.org> + <87vcl6nfda.fsf@awakening.csail.mit.edu> + <87aa2hxtrv.fsf@nikula.org> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <87aa2hxtrv.fsf@nikula.org> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) +X-Brightmail-Tracker: + H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFuplleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IRYrdT1+0Rb/c3OL3BwqJpurPF9ZszmS06 + bu9mc2D2uHX/NbvHs1W3mD0+Pr3FEsAcxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWxpvMZU8Fv4YqZezvZGhh3 + 8XcxcnBICJhI3Pir0MXICWSKSVy4t56ti5GLQ0hgH6PE9tsbmSGcDYwSW+ZeZ4dwTjJJ3P90 + F6psCaPE739dbCD9LAKqEm0Hn7KD2GwCGhLb9i9nBLFFBBQlNp/cD2YzC8RLPLr8hRXEFhYw + l/j4fwIziM0roCPxbM8yqHVPmCTeNPazQyQEJU7OfMIC0awlcePfSyaQu5kFpCWW/+MACXMC + 7WrY/4YJxBYVUJGYcnIb2wRGoVlIumch6Z6F0L2AkXkVo2xKbpVubmJmTnFqsm5xcmJeXmqR + rolebmaJXmpK6SZGUKhzSvLvYPx2UOkQowAHoxIP74tnbf5CrIllxZW5hxglOZiURHk/C7X7 + C/El5adUZiQWZ8QXleakFh9ilOBgVhLh/fMYqJw3JbGyKrUoHyYlzcGiJM6rpvXOT0ggPbEk + NTs1tSC1CCYrw8GhJMH7HWSoYFFqempFWmZOCUKaiYMTZDgP0PDVIDW8xQWJucWZ6RD5U4yK + UuK8/MJACQGQREZpHlwvLBW9YhQHekWY9z1IOw8wjcF1vwIazAQ0mE8B5OrikkSElFQDo+hJ + lomBsqpXDGvmhEycfn7zrxBVe7+Eu0YTludN05/NPPnihmAJl7JbR8MnTj5ZuXJ1ZZ2i9cR9 + 997UT3mWmCP1886TWf8XdIvNY5vjvXGl6+VvqWVJcdxa+ddX5X307lr37PraqU+uTL38hUVT + 6KHNfkb/aTMD8mYWVaQU9dY2qCbmTA0IXq/EUpyRaKjFXFScCAABk71WIAMAAA== +Cc: Notmuch Mail +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:57:34 -0000 + +Quoth Jani Nikula on Apr 12 at 8:02 am: +> On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:11:13 -0400, Austin Clements wrote: +> > On Mon, 09 Apr 2012, Jani Nikula wrote: +> > > Vladimir Marek writes: +> > > I'm throwing in a third alternative below. Does it work for you? I think +> > > it's both prettier and uglier than the above at the same time! ;) +> > > +> > > A middle ground would be to change the callers to use +> > > "notmuch_talloc_steal", and just #define notmuch_talloc_steal +> > > talloc_steal if __GNUC__ >= 3. +> > > +> > > One could argue upstream talloc should have this, but OTOH it's a C +> > > library. +> > > +> > > BR, +> > > Jani. +> > > +> > > +> > > diff --git a/lib/notmuch-private.h b/lib/notmuch-private.h +> > > index ea836f7..83b46e8 100644 +> > > --- a/lib/notmuch-private.h +> > > +++ b/lib/notmuch-private.h +> > > @@ -499,4 +499,22 @@ _notmuch_filenames_create (const void *ctx, +> > > +> > > NOTMUCH_END_DECLS +> > > +> > > +#ifdef __cplusplus +> > > +/* Implicit typecast from 'void *' to 'T *' is okay in C, but not in +> > > + * C++. In talloc_steal, an explicit cast is provided for type safety +> > > + * in some GCC versions. Otherwise, a cast is required. Provide a +> > > + * template function for this to maintain type safety, and redefine +> > > + * talloc_steal to use it. +> > > + */ +> > > +#if !(__GNUC__ >= 3) +> > > +template +> > > +T *notmuch_talloc_steal(const void *new_ctx, const T *ptr) +> > > +{ +> > > + return static_cast(talloc_steal(new_ctx, ptr)); +> > > +} +> > > +#undef talloc_steal +> > > +#define talloc_steal notmuch_talloc_steal +> > > +#endif +> > > +#endif +> > > + +> > > #endif +> > +> > This looks good to me. I was originally concerned that this depended on +> > talloc_steal being a macro, but I realized that's not actually the case. +> > Care to roll a real patch? +> +> Sure. +> +> One question: the template must be outside NOTMUCH_{BEGIN,END}_DECLS +> (which are just macros for extern "C" block) but should it be within the +> #pragma GCC visibility push(hidden) and pop directives? I'm not familiar +> with that. + +Hmm. I'm not sure, but it can't hurt to have it inside the visibility +directives. My guess would be that it will affect the visibility of +the symbols produced when the template is instantiated, which we don't +want to be visible outside the library. (As long as that doesn't mess +up the linker's handling of weak symbols.) + +> Thanks for the review. +> +> +> BR, +> Jani. -- 2.26.2