[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body as a ptr

Segher Boessenkool segher at kernel.crashing.org
Mon Feb 28 20:53:07 UTC 2022

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:14:44PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:10 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > We can do
> >
> >         typeof(pos) pos
> >
> > in the 'for ()' loop, and never use __iter at all.
> >
> > That means that inside the for-loop, we use a _different_ 'pos' than outside.
> The thing that makes me throw up in my mouth a bit is that in that
>         typeof(pos) pos
> the first 'pos' (that we use for just the typeof) is that outer-level
> 'pos', IOW it's a *different* 'pos' than the second 'pos' in that same
> declaration that declares the inner level shadowing new 'pos'
> variable.

The new "pos" has not yet been declared, so this has to refer to the
outer "pos", it cannot be the inner one.  Because it hasn't been
declared yet :-)

Compare this to
  typeof (pos) pos = pos;
where that last "pos" *does* refer to the newly declared one: that
declaration has already been done!  (So this code is UB btw,

> If I was a compiler person, I would say "Linus, that thing is too ugly
> to live", and I would hate it. I'm just hoping that even compiler
> people say "that's *so* ugly it's almost beautiful".

It is perfectly well-defined.  Well, it would be good if we (GCC) would
document it does work, and if someone tested it on LLVM as well.  But it
is really hard to implement it to *not* work :-)

> Because it does seem to work. It's not pretty, but hey, it's not like
> our headers are really ever be winning any beauty contests...

It is very pretty!  Needs a comment though :-)


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list