This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the newlib project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: strnlen, strict ansi, newlib vs glibc

Attached is a new version of the patch. Comments interspersed.

On 8/15/2014 6:52 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 14 17:53, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> This type of change is always tricky. FreeBSD's string.h only had
>> __STRICT_ANSI__.  I read the glibc version and attempted to
>> translate their feature flags into the BSD style ones we have
>> from <sys/cdefs.h>.
>> There are a few methods I have no idea how to guard:
>> + The block of Windows strcmpi and friends at the bottom
>> of the file.
> Nuke them.  We don't have any Windows target, and Cygwin doesn't export
> those.  They are likely a remnant from the time the Cygwin devs were
> trying to make Cygwin a MSVCRT replacement (pre 1999).
Done. :)
>> + strlwr() and strupr(). No idea where those originated.
> These ill-advised functions, which apparently predate any multibyte
> concernes are actually in newlib.  They are ASCII only, non-standard,
> and inherently broken by design.  So the question is, do we really want
> to export them?  If so, maybe we should guard them with something like
>   #ifdef __USE_NONSTD
That does not appear anywhere in the source. I hate to add a new guard.
They are wrapped in !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__).

I am at a loss to do more.
>> + _strerror_r() is another unknown origination.
> This is the REENT version of strerror_r, as you already commented in
> your patch.  In theory, these functions are outside of any standard,
> just by having the underscore prepended.  I don't think they need
> any standards guard.
OK. I dropped my comment in the file about not knowing what to do.
>> Attached is try1. I expect there to be a few rounds of this.
>> I did build a complete sparc-rtems toolset and all RTEMS tests.
>> Please check what I did and offer corrections and improvements.
>> I tried to not rearrange the file. There is likely opportunity to
>> group methods with similar guards.
> Other than the above, looks good except:
>> +#if (_XSI_VISIBLE - 0) >= 500
> shouldn't be necessary.  If sys/cdefs.h is included, _XSI_VISIBLE
> exists.
>    #if _XSI_VISIBLE >= 500
> should be sufficient.
I fixed that pattern everywhere it occurred.
> Thanks,
> Corinna

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985

Attachment: string_h-v2.diff
Description: Text document

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]