From 6700889937360055699 X-Google-Thread: 7894ca11fe,661f9f6c1b45f277 X-Google-Attributes: gid7894ca11fe,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:50:08 -0500 Return-Path: To: (Usenet) From: "Bo Persson" Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Two thoughts about attributes in the FCD Organization: unknown Sender: cppmods@cs.rpi.edu Approved: james.dennett@gmail.com Message-ID: <83rbioFejhU1@mid.individual.net> References: X-Original-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:03:04 +0200 X-Submission-Address: std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:44:50 CST Lines: 44 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-SWzEkbtJPjXMCVi0k9CVj/ENT7eshAzvJ19HbFFohDLiia1+E9y65aVp4wDgKb1VD0bLjVqOch5WgZ5!1Dx/8PD1OzTK/QCRSOMjUCWRHoalRYy8UH7bFZVBL63EOw1MrOj0XZnkOQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.std.c++:2474 Olaf Krzikalla wrote: > Hi again, > > and sorry for responding to my own posting. Nevertheless I hope > someone else is reading. > > Olaf Krzikalla schrieb: > >> 2. =A77.6.1.5 states, that attibute tokens not being specified >> behave implementation-defined. Shouldn't we restrict this in a >> way, that attibutes unknown to an particular implementation shall >> be ignored. Like: an implementation is not allowed to refuse >> compilation only because a syntactically correct attribute-token >> is unknown. Maybe someone can rephrase this to standard speak. >> > During a discussion about adding attributes to clang I noticed that > section 7.6.1.5 as written IMHO opens a can of worms. If everybody > is > allowed to add arbitrary attributes then we can't extend the set of > predefined attributes in the future without the danger of breaking > standard-conform code. Thus I would propose that the use of > attributes in the global and std attribute-namespace cause > undefined behavior unless they are defined in the standard. This > keeps the freedom to standardize more attributes in the future. For > attributes in other namespaces the behavior is still implementation > defined. But as I wrote in my previous post, we should add the > sentence: > "Any attribute (not in the global and std attribute-namespace) that > is not recognized by the implementation is ignored." > Including misspelled attributes? Could introduce interesting new bugs! Bo Persson -- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]