[webkit-dev] maybe_unused vs UNUSED_PARAM

[Ryosuke Niwa]

If we’re adopting [[maybe_unused]], do we just write that directly in each function declaration / definition? Or do we define some a macro to do that anyway?

What bout other kinds of attributes like [[noreturn]], [[fallthrough]], and [[likely]]? Are we gonna start writing them directly in code, or are we gonna continue to use macros?

- R. NIwa

> On Jan 24, 2024, at 9:49 AM, Chris Dumez via webkit-dev <webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for starting this discussion.
> 
> I personally think it would be nice for us to switch to [[maybe_unused]] since it is now part of the language and it seems to fit our needs. However, I do think we should be consistent and stop using UNUSED_PARAM() / ASSERT_UNUSED() in new code entirely then.
> 
> So if we decide to switch, I think should add style checks to prevent using UNUSED_PARAM() / ASSERT_UNUSED() and recommend using [[maybe_unused]] instead. Eventually, we should try to phase out existing usage of these macros so that we can remove them entirely.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris.
> 
>> On Jan 24, 2024, at 9:34 AM, Alex Christensen via webkit-dev <webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org> wrote:
>> 
>> For many years we have used the UNUSED_PARAM macros, and we have almost 3000 of them.  C++17 introduced [[maybe_unused]] for this purpose, and a few uses of it are starting to pop up in WebKit.  Should we switch, should we transition, should we allow both, or should we just stick with UNUSED_PARAM?
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev