Patrick Simmons

Just FYI the change I made in the rejected PR #64 works absolutely fine for me so anyone who wants to use it please look it up.

@ChrisDodd `__attribute__((used))` is present in both GCC and Clang, so that part of the code shouldn't break anything except MSVC++, which it seems like p4c already doesn't support. If p4c...

The sanitizer failure is very plausible since the constructor for `MoveInitializers` leaves the `loopsBackToStart` boolean uninitialized, but it is not particularly likely that this PR could itself contain a bug...

I'm off today and Monday and so will make changes to the PR to address reviewer comments on Tuesday. For now, I have no objections to replacing `__THROW` with `noexcept`...

@asl-AMD, glibc has never claimed to restrict its implementing code to anything other than the GNU standards of C and C++. clang can't even compile glibc because clang only has...

@asl well, sure, I don't want to debate this either :) That's why I originally changed it for you without discussion. But, I do think it's somewhat better with noexcept...

@asl I don't think the `noexcept` keyword exists in ISO C or in GNU C. It looks like `__THROW` decays to `__attribute__ ((__nothrow__ __LEAF))` when compiling under C instead of...

@asl yes, we shouldn't push code to `p4c` that breaks clang in a supported or common configuration. That's why we need the `GNOEXCEPT` thing. The two proposals are: - `#define...

I'm having difficulty reproducing the link error with p4c master. If I can't, I'm not sure if there is sufficient motivation to have the `malloc()` and friends prototypes in this...

The only place I can reproduce this error is inside a docker with a locally-compiled GCC 9.5 running on CentOS 7. So, the link problem is almost certainly a host...