This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the newlib project.
Re: missing methods in inttypes.h
- From: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen at redhat dot com>
- To: newlib at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 17:57:34 +0200
- Subject: Re: missing methods in inttypes.h
- References: <51F678CC dot 2070901 at oarcorp dot com> <20130730091311 dot GM4166 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51F7C6FC dot 7070101 at oarcorp dot com>
- Reply-to: newlib at sourceware dot org
On Jul 30 09:00, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 7/30/2013 4:13 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Jul 29 09:14, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >>I am curious where the missing methods from inttypes.h
> >>should go (eventually) in the source tree?
> >>intmax_t imaxabs(intmax_t);
> >>imaxdiv_t imaxdiv(intmax_t, intmax_t);
> >>intmax_t strtoimax(const char *restrict, char **restrict, int);
> >>uintmax_t strtoumax(const char *restrict, char **restrict, int);
> >>intmax_t wcstoimax(const wchar_t *restrict, wchar_t **restrict, int);
> >>uintmax_t wcstoumax(const wchar_t *restrict, wchar_t **restrict, int);
> >For Cygwin, they are just aliases of the respective method using the
> >biggest available datatype:
> > imaxabs = llabs
> > imaxdiv = lldiv
> > strtoimax = strtoll
> > strtoumax = strtoull
> > wcstoimax = wcstoll
> > wcstoumax = wcstoull
> >In theory, every target can handle it that way without the need
> >to implement these functions explicitely.
> When you say aliases, do you mean just wrapper methods?
> Can the Cygwin versions be merged into newlib so every newlib target
> has these?
The current Cygwin method can't be folded into newlib because it
uses ld's DEF file facility which is Windows-specific.
However, what we could do in newlib is either adding #defines as in
#define strtoimax strtoll
etc., or we could use symbol aliases as in
#define EXPORT_ALIAS(sym,symalias) extern "C" __typeof (sym) symalias __attribute__ ((alias(#sym)));
EXPORT_ALIAS (strtoll, strtoimax)
We use this in Cygwin as well in some cases.
> FWIW when I looked at FreeBSD, the few I looked at had their own
> real implementations which were not wrappers. I can see that wrapping
> the largest type is OK though.
It's also better for small targets if there's only one implementation,