This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: C11 threads ABI questions - enum values
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: Rich Felker <dalias at libc dot org>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: C11 threads ABI questions - enum values
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140727203825 dot GA13146 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1408181622440 dot 743 at monopod dot intra dot ispras dot ru> <20140818192714 dot GS12888 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <20141001211308 dot 88F742C397E at topped-with-meat dot com> <20141001211606 dot GN23797 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <20141001213022 dot 798942C3AAD at topped-with-meat dot com> <20141002001720 dot GO23797 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx>
> My motive for wanting success to have a value of 0 is that it allows
Yeah, I'm fine with that one. I meant the argument value cases.
> For mutex types, I suppose there's some risk of "sloppily" passing a
> literal 0 without meaning mtx_plain, but I think it's a small issue
> and I hope we can agree that keeping a common set of constants for ABI
> purposes is of more value.
We're not going to set a precedent of clearing ABI choices with another
implementation or letting another implementation's past choices dictate
to us. Of course, harmonization is a good thing. But you need to be
realistic about the relative positions of musl and glibc in terms of
installed base and de facto standards for GNU/Linux systems.
This is a brand new feature and musl has few users even for features that
have existed for any length of time. Are you really saying you cannot
change your recent ABI choices for new things that nobody is actually using?