Re: Positioning GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED

[John W. Eaton]

On 12/27/2015 07:34 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 12/26/2015 11:20 PM, Rik wrote:
> > 12/26/15
> >
> > I would not have necessarily thought of this, but for the fact that
> > this is
> > already being done in ov.h.  For example,
> >
> > GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED octave_idx_type capacity (void) const
> >
> > versus
> >
> > octave_value (const charMatrix& chm, bool is_string,
> >                char type = '\'') GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED;
>
> I didn't realize that it could be anywhere except the end.  If it can be
> at the beginning, then move it there.  May as well move all of them. How
> about putting it at the beginning on a separate line?

After looking at this a bit more, I found that attributes can be applied 
to function definitions as well as declarations, but only if they appear 
before the function name.  So something like

  static void foobar (void) __attribute__ ((noreturn)) { ... }

fails to compile, but

  __attribute__ ((noreturn)) static void foobar (void) { ... }

is OK.  I recently added separate declarations for some static functions 
just so that I could tag them with the noreturn attribute.  But now I 
see that I could have avoided teh duplication.  I'll fix that.

Also, with C++11, "[[noreturn]]" is the standard way of specifying the 
noreturn attribute.

So I think we should rename GCC_ATTR_NORETURN to be OCTAVE_ATTR_NORETURN 
(or something that does not appear to be specific to GCC) and then move 
all these attributes to be the first thing in the function declaration 
(or definition).

jwe