[fossil-users] coding style guidelines: c89

2011-09-06 Thread Martin S. Weber 

Hi,

fossil currently does not build in a ANSI C-89 environment - a requirement of 
the coding style guidelines ([1], point 16). There's an obvious build error in 
http_ssl.c (C++ style comments), but there's something more in sha1.c...
When adding a -std=c89 to the generated Makefile with gcc as the compiler, I 
end up getting (ignoring the C++ style comment at line 87)

./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token
./bld/sha1_.c:104: error: expected ')' before ':' token

(and many, many, many, many more lines like that). This seems to be because of 
the calls to asm() ... I don't know how to fix that. FYI, after preprocessing, 
the first instruction of line 104 looks like:


 qq[4]+=((qq[1](qq[2]^qq[3]))^qq[3])+(block[0] = (({ unsigned
int y; asm(rorl  %1,%0 : =r (y) : I (8), 0 (block[0]));
y; })0xFF00FF00) |(({ unsigned int y; asm(roll  %1,%0 :
=r (y) : I (8), 0 (block[0])); y; })0x00FF00FF))+0x5A827999+({
unsigned int y; asm(roll  %1,%0 : =r (y) : I (5), 0
(qq[0])); y; });

[1] http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/style.wiki
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] coding style guidelines: c89

2011-09-06 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger 
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 04:21:43PM -0400, Martin S. Weber wrote:
 When adding a -std=c89 to the generated Makefile with gcc as the
 compiler, I end up getting (ignoring the C++ style comment at line
 87)

That was part of
http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/f2ede7da6d70851

I don't get that commit -- both GCC 4.1 and 4.5 certainly do use the
rotate instructions. As such I am strongly in favour of just reverting
that change...

Joerg
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] coding style guidelines: c89

2011-09-06 Thread Ron Wilson 
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Martin S. Weber martin.we...@nist.gov wrote:
 (and many, many, many, many more lines like that). This seems to be because
 of the calls to asm() ... I don't know how to fix that. FYI, after
 preprocessing, the first instruction of line 104 looks like:

  qq[4]+=((qq[1](qq[2]^qq[3]))^qq[3])+(block[0] = (({ unsigned
    int y; asm(rorl  %1,%0 : =r (y) : I (8), 0 (block[0]));
    y; })0xFF00FF00) |(({ unsigned int y; asm(roll  %1,%0 :
    =r (y) : I (8), 0 (block[0])); y; })0x00FF00FF))+0x5A827999+({
    unsigned int y; asm(roll  %1,%0 : =r (y) : I (5), 0
    (qq[0])); y; });

The asm() calls are being used to invoke the rotate instructions. C
does not have operators for peforming bitwise rotation of an operand
and emulating a rotate using shifts is messy and very ineficient:

unsigned int rotateLeft(unsigned int x, unsigned int n)
{
unsigned int t;

t = x  (SIZEOFINT - n);
return ((x  n) | t);
}
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] coding style guidelines: c89

2011-09-06 Thread Dmitry Chestnykh 
On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Ron Wilson wrote:
 
 The asm() calls are being used to invoke the rotate instructions. C
 does not have operators for peforming bitwise rotation of an operand
 and emulating a rotate using shifts is messy and very ineficient:
 
 unsigned int rotateLeft(unsigned int x, unsigned int n)
 {
unsigned int t;
 
t = x  (SIZEOFINT - n);
return ((x  n) | t);
 }

FYI,

$ gcc -O2 -S rotate.c
$ cat rotate.s
…
_rotateLeft:
Leh_func_begin1:
pushq   %rbp
Ltmp0:
movq%rsp, %rbp
Ltmp1:
movb%sil, %cl
movl%edi, %eax
roll%cl, %eax
popq%rbp
ret
Leh_func_end1:
..

$ gcc --version
i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc. build 5658) 
(LLVM build 2335.15.00)

(This is GCC with LLVM backend (default on OS X Lion)).

--
Dmitry Chestnykh

___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Re: [fossil-users] coding style guidelines: c89

2011-09-06 Thread Ron Wilson 
I guess I'm too used to dealing with dumb compilers.

1. Does it work with the C89 restrictions turned on?

2. Does C89 support inline functions?

3. If not, will it handle the folowing correctly?
   #define rotateLeft(x,n) { unsigned int t; t = x  (SIZEOFINT -
n); x = (x  n) | t; } /* bitwise rotate x by n bits left */

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.com wrote:
 FYI,

 $ gcc -O2 -S rotate.c
 $ cat rotate.s
 …
 _rotateLeft:
 Leh_func_begin1:
        pushq   %rbp
 Ltmp0:
        movq    %rsp, %rbp
 Ltmp1:
        movb    %sil, %cl
        movl    %edi, %eax
        roll    %cl, %eax
        popq    %rbp
        ret
 Leh_func_end1:
 ..

 $ gcc --version
 i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2 (GCC) 4.2.1 (Based on Apple Inc. build 5658) 
 (LLVM build 2335.15.00)
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users