[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cfe-dev
Subject:    Re: [cfe-dev] [PROPOSAL] Reintroduce guards for Intel intrinsic headers
From:       Reid Kleckner <rnk () google ! com>
Date:       2015-07-30 18:04:37
Message-ID: CACs=tyK1PexvVqTY-oAWu0VXXDuFsU9GijKbp+QGu6=nRyLg_w () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> What kind of file is this? Keep in mind that things in the global
> namespace prefixed with an underscore is a reserved name for implementers
> as well. That would make this code not standards compliant as well.
>

The actual C++ rules are that any name with double underscores is reserved,
and names beginning with an underscore followed by a capital letter. So,
the Intel intrinsics are *not* in the implementer's namespace, but that was
probably a mistake.

I'm sympathetic to users who are probably implementing a compatibility
layer here and don't want to write their own intrinsic wrappers, but I
think the right tradeoff is probably to fix the code.

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:33 \
AM, Eric Christopher <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:echristo@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">echristo@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" \
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div \
class="gmail_quote"><div>What kind of file is this? Keep in mind that things in the global \
namespace prefixed with an underscore is a reserved name for implementers as well. That would \
make this code not standards compliant as \
well.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The actual C++ rules are that any name \
with double underscores is reserved, and names beginning with an underscore followed by a \
capital letter. So, the Intel intrinsics are *not* in the implementer&#39;s namespace, but that \
was probably a mistake.</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m sympathetic to users who are probably \
implementing a compatibility layer here and don&#39;t want to write their own intrinsic \
wrappers, but I think the right tradeoff is probably to fix the code.</div></div></div></div>



_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]