runtime(doc): clarify C99 constraints and portability assumptions
closes: #17748 Co-authored-by: dkearns <dougkearns@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Damien Lejay <damien@lejay.be> Signed-off-by: Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org>
This commit is contained in:
committed by
Christian Brabandt
parent
e1c507a965
commit
689f3bf313
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
||||
*develop.txt* For Vim version 9.1. Last change: 2025 Jul 18
|
||||
*develop.txt* For Vim version 9.1. Last change: 2025 Jul 21
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
VIM REFERENCE MANUAL by Bram Moolenaar
|
||||
@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ This text is important for those who want to be involved in further developing
|
||||
Vim.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Design goals |design-goals|
|
||||
2. Coding style |coding-style|
|
||||
3. Design decisions |design-decisions|
|
||||
4. Assumptions |design-assumptions|
|
||||
2. Design decisions |design-decisions|
|
||||
3. Assumptions |design-assumptions|
|
||||
4. Coding style |coding-style|
|
||||
|
||||
See the file README.txt in the "src" directory for an overview of the source
|
||||
code.
|
||||
@ -159,7 +159,205 @@ VIM IS... NOT *design-not*
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
==============================================================================
|
||||
2. Coding style *coding-style*
|
||||
2. Design decisions *design-decisions*
|
||||
|
||||
Folding
|
||||
|
||||
Several forms of folding should be possible for the same buffer. For example,
|
||||
have one window that shows the text with function bodies folded, another
|
||||
window that shows a function body.
|
||||
|
||||
Folding is a way to display the text. It should not change the text itself.
|
||||
Therefore the folding has been implemented as a filter between the text stored
|
||||
in a buffer (buffer lines) and the text displayed in a window (logical lines).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Naming the window
|
||||
|
||||
The word "window" is commonly used for several things: A window on the screen,
|
||||
the xterm window, a window inside Vim to view a buffer.
|
||||
To avoid confusion, other items that are sometimes called window have been
|
||||
given another name. Here is an overview of the related items:
|
||||
|
||||
screen The whole display. For the GUI it's something like 1024x768
|
||||
pixels. The Vim shell can use the whole screen or part of it.
|
||||
shell The Vim application. This can cover the whole screen (e.g.,
|
||||
when running in a console) or part of it (xterm or GUI).
|
||||
window View on a buffer. There can be several windows in Vim,
|
||||
together with the command line, menubar, toolbar, etc. they
|
||||
fit in the shell.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Spell checking *develop-spell*
|
||||
|
||||
When spell checking was going to be added to Vim a survey was done over the
|
||||
available spell checking libraries and programs. Unfortunately, the result
|
||||
was that none of them provided sufficient capabilities to be used as the spell
|
||||
checking engine in Vim, for various reasons:
|
||||
|
||||
- Missing support for multibyte encodings. At least UTF-8 must be supported,
|
||||
so that more than one language can be used in the same file.
|
||||
Doing on-the-fly conversion is not always possible (would require iconv
|
||||
support).
|
||||
- For the programs and libraries: Using them as-is would require installing
|
||||
them separately from Vim. That's mostly not impossible, but a drawback.
|
||||
- Performance: A few tests showed that it's possible to check spelling on the
|
||||
fly (while redrawing), just like syntax highlighting. But the mechanisms
|
||||
used by other code are much slower. Myspell uses a hashtable, for example.
|
||||
The affix compression that most spell checkers use makes it slower too.
|
||||
- For using an external program like aspell a communication mechanism would
|
||||
have to be setup. That's complicated to do in a portable way (Unix-only
|
||||
would be relatively simple, but that's not good enough). And performance
|
||||
will become a problem (lots of process switching involved).
|
||||
- Missing support for words with non-word characters, such as "Etten-Leur" and
|
||||
"et al.", would require marking the pieces of them OK, lowering the
|
||||
reliability.
|
||||
- Missing support for regions or dialects. Makes it difficult to accept
|
||||
all English words and highlight non-Canadian words differently.
|
||||
- Missing support for rare words. Many words are correct but hardly ever used
|
||||
and could be a misspelled often-used word.
|
||||
- For making suggestions the speed is less important and requiring to install
|
||||
another program or library would be acceptable. But the word lists probably
|
||||
differ, the suggestions may be wrong words.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Spelling suggestions *develop-spell-suggestions*
|
||||
|
||||
For making suggestions there are two basic mechanisms:
|
||||
1. Try changing the bad word a little bit and check for a match with a good
|
||||
word. Or go through the list of good words, change them a little bit and
|
||||
check for a match with the bad word. The changes are deleting a character,
|
||||
inserting a character, swapping two characters, etc.
|
||||
2. Perform soundfolding on both the bad word and the good words and then find
|
||||
matches, possibly with a few changes like with the first mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
The first is good for finding typing mistakes. After experimenting with
|
||||
hashtables and looking at solutions from other spell checkers the conclusion
|
||||
was that a trie (a kind of tree structure) is ideal for this. Both for
|
||||
reducing memory use and being able to try sensible changes. For example, when
|
||||
inserting a character only characters that lead to good words need to be
|
||||
tried. Other mechanisms (with hashtables) need to try all possible letters at
|
||||
every position in the word. Also, a hashtable has the requirement that word
|
||||
boundaries are identified separately, while a trie does not require this.
|
||||
That makes the mechanism a lot simpler.
|
||||
|
||||
Soundfolding is useful when someone knows how the words sounds but doesn't
|
||||
know how it is spelled. For example, the word "dictionary" might be written
|
||||
as "daktonerie". The number of changes that the first method would need to
|
||||
try is very big, it's hard to find the good word that way. After soundfolding
|
||||
the words become "tktnr" and "tkxnry", these differ by only two letters.
|
||||
|
||||
To find words by their soundfolded equivalent (soundalike word) we need a list
|
||||
of all soundfolded words. A few experiments have been done to find out what
|
||||
the best method is. Alternatives:
|
||||
1. Do the sound folding on the fly when looking for suggestions. This means
|
||||
walking through the trie of good words, soundfolding each word and
|
||||
checking how different it is from the bad word. This is very efficient for
|
||||
memory use, but takes a long time. On a fast PC it takes a couple of
|
||||
seconds for English, which can be acceptable for interactive use. But for
|
||||
some languages it takes more than ten seconds (e.g., German, Catalan),
|
||||
which is unacceptably slow. For batch processing (automatic corrections)
|
||||
it's too slow for all languages.
|
||||
2. Use a trie for the soundfolded words, so that searching can be done just
|
||||
like how it works without soundfolding. This requires remembering a list
|
||||
of good words for each soundfolded word. This makes finding matches very
|
||||
fast but requires quite a lot of memory, in the order of 1 to 10 Mbyte.
|
||||
For some languages more than the original word list.
|
||||
3. Like the second alternative, but reduce the amount of memory by using affix
|
||||
compression and store only the soundfolded basic word. This is what Aspell
|
||||
does. Disadvantage is that affixes need to be stripped from the bad word
|
||||
before soundfolding it, which means that mistakes at the start and/or end
|
||||
of the word will cause the mechanism to fail. Also, this becomes slow when
|
||||
the bad word is quite different from the good word.
|
||||
|
||||
The choice made is to use the second mechanism and use a separate file. This
|
||||
way a user with sufficient memory can get very good suggestions while a user
|
||||
who is short of memory or just wants the spell checking and no suggestions
|
||||
doesn't use so much memory.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Word frequency
|
||||
|
||||
For sorting suggestions it helps to know which words are common. In theory we
|
||||
could store a word frequency with the word in the dictionary. However, this
|
||||
requires storing a count per word. That degrades word tree compression a lot.
|
||||
And maintaining the word frequency for all languages will be a heavy task.
|
||||
Also, it would be nice to prefer words that are already in the text. This way
|
||||
the words that appear in the specific text are preferred for suggestions.
|
||||
|
||||
What has been implemented is to count words that have been seen during
|
||||
displaying. A hashtable is used to quickly find the word count. The count is
|
||||
initialized from words listed in COMMON items in the affix file, so that it
|
||||
also works when starting a new file.
|
||||
|
||||
This isn't ideal, because the longer Vim is running the higher the counts
|
||||
become. But in practice it is a noticeable improvement over not using the word
|
||||
count.
|
||||
|
||||
==============================================================================
|
||||
3. Assumptions *design-assumptions*
|
||||
|
||||
The following sections define the portability and compatibility constraints that
|
||||
all Vim code and build tools must adhere to.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
MAKEFILES *assumptions-makefiles*
|
||||
*POSIX.1-2001*
|
||||
|
||||
Vim’s main Makefiles target maximum portability, relying solely on features
|
||||
defined in POSIX.1-2001 `make` and ignoring later POSIX standards or
|
||||
GNU/BSD extensions. In practical terms, avoid:
|
||||
|
||||
– % pattern rules
|
||||
– modern assignment (`:=`, `::=`) outside POSIX.1-2001
|
||||
– special targets (`.ONESHELL`, `.NOTPARALLEL`, `.SILENT`, …)
|
||||
– order-only prerequisites (`|`) or automatic directory creation
|
||||
– GNU/BSD conditionals (`ifdef`, `ifndef`, `.for`/`.endfor`, …)
|
||||
|
||||
Since POSIX.1-2001 supports only traditional suffix rules, every object
|
||||
built in a separate directory must have an explicit rule. For example:
|
||||
|
||||
objects/evalbuffer.o: evalbuffer.c
|
||||
$(CCC) -o $@ evalbuffer.c
|
||||
|
||||
This verbosity ensures that the same Makefile builds Vim unchanged with
|
||||
the default `make` on Linux, *BSD, macOS, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and virtually
|
||||
any Unix-like OS.
|
||||
|
||||
Some platform-specific Makefiles (e.g., for Windows, NSIS, or Cygwin) may
|
||||
use more advanced features when compatibility with basic make is not
|
||||
required.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
C COMPILER *assumptions-C-compiler*
|
||||
*ANSI-C* *C89* *C90* *C95* *C99*
|
||||
|
||||
Vim strives for maximum portability (see |design-multi-platform|) and must
|
||||
still build with Compaq C V6.4-005 on OpenVMS VAX V7.3.
|
||||
|
||||
Therefore, the latest ISO C standard we follow is:
|
||||
|
||||
`C95` (ISO/IEC 9899:1990/AMD1:1995)
|
||||
|
||||
In addition, the following two `C99` features are explicitly allowed:
|
||||
– `//` comments, as required by |style-comments|;
|
||||
– the `_Bool` type.
|
||||
|
||||
Platform-specific code may use any newer compiler features supported on
|
||||
that platform.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
SIZE OF VARIABLES *assumptions-variables*
|
||||
|
||||
char 8-bit signed
|
||||
char_u 8-bit unsigned
|
||||
int 32- or 64-bit signed (16-bit possible on legacy systems)
|
||||
unsigned 32- or 64-bit unsigned
|
||||
long at least 32-bit signed (large enough to hold a pointer)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
==============================================================================
|
||||
4. Coding style *coding-style*
|
||||
|
||||
These are the rules to use when making changes to the Vim source code. Please
|
||||
stick to these rules, to keep the sources readable and maintainable.
|
||||
@ -198,23 +396,6 @@ Other source files do not yet correspond to the .clang-format file. This may
|
||||
change in the future and they may be reformatted as well.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
C COMPILER *style-compiler* *ANSI-C* *C89* *C99*
|
||||
|
||||
The minimal C compiler version supported is C89, also known as ANSI C.
|
||||
Later standards, such as C99, are not widely supported, or at least not 100%
|
||||
supported. Therefore we use only some of the C99 features and explicitly
|
||||
disallow some (this will gradually be adjusted over time).
|
||||
|
||||
Features not to be used ~
|
||||
|
||||
These C99 features are not to be used, because not enough compilers support
|
||||
them:
|
||||
- Variable length arrays (even in C11 this is an optional feature).
|
||||
- C99 _Bool and _Complex types.
|
||||
- "inline" (it's hardly ever needed, let the optimizer do its work)
|
||||
- flexible array members: Not supported by HP-UX C compiler (John Marriott)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
COMMENTS *style-comments*
|
||||
|
||||
Try to avoid putting multiline comments inside a function body: if the
|
||||
@ -513,153 +694,4 @@ OK: do
|
||||
while (cond);
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
==============================================================================
|
||||
3. Design decisions *design-decisions*
|
||||
|
||||
Folding
|
||||
|
||||
Several forms of folding should be possible for the same buffer. For example,
|
||||
have one window that shows the text with function bodies folded, another
|
||||
window that shows a function body.
|
||||
|
||||
Folding is a way to display the text. It should not change the text itself.
|
||||
Therefore the folding has been implemented as a filter between the text stored
|
||||
in a buffer (buffer lines) and the text displayed in a window (logical lines).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Naming the window
|
||||
|
||||
The word "window" is commonly used for several things: A window on the screen,
|
||||
the xterm window, a window inside Vim to view a buffer.
|
||||
To avoid confusion, other items that are sometimes called window have been
|
||||
given another name. Here is an overview of the related items:
|
||||
|
||||
screen The whole display. For the GUI it's something like 1024x768
|
||||
pixels. The Vim shell can use the whole screen or part of it.
|
||||
shell The Vim application. This can cover the whole screen (e.g.,
|
||||
when running in a console) or part of it (xterm or GUI).
|
||||
window View on a buffer. There can be several windows in Vim,
|
||||
together with the command line, menubar, toolbar, etc. they
|
||||
fit in the shell.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Spell checking *develop-spell*
|
||||
|
||||
When spell checking was going to be added to Vim a survey was done over the
|
||||
available spell checking libraries and programs. Unfortunately, the result
|
||||
was that none of them provided sufficient capabilities to be used as the spell
|
||||
checking engine in Vim, for various reasons:
|
||||
|
||||
- Missing support for multibyte encodings. At least UTF-8 must be supported,
|
||||
so that more than one language can be used in the same file.
|
||||
Doing on-the-fly conversion is not always possible (would require iconv
|
||||
support).
|
||||
- For the programs and libraries: Using them as-is would require installing
|
||||
them separately from Vim. That's mostly not impossible, but a drawback.
|
||||
- Performance: A few tests showed that it's possible to check spelling on the
|
||||
fly (while redrawing), just like syntax highlighting. But the mechanisms
|
||||
used by other code are much slower. Myspell uses a hashtable, for example.
|
||||
The affix compression that most spell checkers use makes it slower too.
|
||||
- For using an external program like aspell a communication mechanism would
|
||||
have to be setup. That's complicated to do in a portable way (Unix-only
|
||||
would be relatively simple, but that's not good enough). And performance
|
||||
will become a problem (lots of process switching involved).
|
||||
- Missing support for words with non-word characters, such as "Etten-Leur" and
|
||||
"et al.", would require marking the pieces of them OK, lowering the
|
||||
reliability.
|
||||
- Missing support for regions or dialects. Makes it difficult to accept
|
||||
all English words and highlight non-Canadian words differently.
|
||||
- Missing support for rare words. Many words are correct but hardly ever used
|
||||
and could be a misspelled often-used word.
|
||||
- For making suggestions the speed is less important and requiring to install
|
||||
another program or library would be acceptable. But the word lists probably
|
||||
differ, the suggestions may be wrong words.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Spelling suggestions *develop-spell-suggestions*
|
||||
|
||||
For making suggestions there are two basic mechanisms:
|
||||
1. Try changing the bad word a little bit and check for a match with a good
|
||||
word. Or go through the list of good words, change them a little bit and
|
||||
check for a match with the bad word. The changes are deleting a character,
|
||||
inserting a character, swapping two characters, etc.
|
||||
2. Perform soundfolding on both the bad word and the good words and then find
|
||||
matches, possibly with a few changes like with the first mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
The first is good for finding typing mistakes. After experimenting with
|
||||
hashtables and looking at solutions from other spell checkers the conclusion
|
||||
was that a trie (a kind of tree structure) is ideal for this. Both for
|
||||
reducing memory use and being able to try sensible changes. For example, when
|
||||
inserting a character only characters that lead to good words need to be
|
||||
tried. Other mechanisms (with hashtables) need to try all possible letters at
|
||||
every position in the word. Also, a hashtable has the requirement that word
|
||||
boundaries are identified separately, while a trie does not require this.
|
||||
That makes the mechanism a lot simpler.
|
||||
|
||||
Soundfolding is useful when someone knows how the words sounds but doesn't
|
||||
know how it is spelled. For example, the word "dictionary" might be written
|
||||
as "daktonerie". The number of changes that the first method would need to
|
||||
try is very big, it's hard to find the good word that way. After soundfolding
|
||||
the words become "tktnr" and "tkxnry", these differ by only two letters.
|
||||
|
||||
To find words by their soundfolded equivalent (soundalike word) we need a list
|
||||
of all soundfolded words. A few experiments have been done to find out what
|
||||
the best method is. Alternatives:
|
||||
1. Do the sound folding on the fly when looking for suggestions. This means
|
||||
walking through the trie of good words, soundfolding each word and
|
||||
checking how different it is from the bad word. This is very efficient for
|
||||
memory use, but takes a long time. On a fast PC it takes a couple of
|
||||
seconds for English, which can be acceptable for interactive use. But for
|
||||
some languages it takes more than ten seconds (e.g., German, Catalan),
|
||||
which is unacceptably slow. For batch processing (automatic corrections)
|
||||
it's too slow for all languages.
|
||||
2. Use a trie for the soundfolded words, so that searching can be done just
|
||||
like how it works without soundfolding. This requires remembering a list
|
||||
of good words for each soundfolded word. This makes finding matches very
|
||||
fast but requires quite a lot of memory, in the order of 1 to 10 Mbyte.
|
||||
For some languages more than the original word list.
|
||||
3. Like the second alternative, but reduce the amount of memory by using affix
|
||||
compression and store only the soundfolded basic word. This is what Aspell
|
||||
does. Disadvantage is that affixes need to be stripped from the bad word
|
||||
before soundfolding it, which means that mistakes at the start and/or end
|
||||
of the word will cause the mechanism to fail. Also, this becomes slow when
|
||||
the bad word is quite different from the good word.
|
||||
|
||||
The choice made is to use the second mechanism and use a separate file. This
|
||||
way a user with sufficient memory can get very good suggestions while a user
|
||||
who is short of memory or just wants the spell checking and no suggestions
|
||||
doesn't use so much memory.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Word frequency
|
||||
|
||||
For sorting suggestions it helps to know which words are common. In theory we
|
||||
could store a word frequency with the word in the dictionary. However, this
|
||||
requires storing a count per word. That degrades word tree compression a lot.
|
||||
And maintaining the word frequency for all languages will be a heavy task.
|
||||
Also, it would be nice to prefer words that are already in the text. This way
|
||||
the words that appear in the specific text are preferred for suggestions.
|
||||
|
||||
What has been implemented is to count words that have been seen during
|
||||
displaying. A hashtable is used to quickly find the word count. The count is
|
||||
initialized from words listed in COMMON items in the affix file, so that it
|
||||
also works when starting a new file.
|
||||
|
||||
This isn't ideal, because the longer Vim is running the higher the counts
|
||||
become. But in practice it is a noticeable improvement over not using the word
|
||||
count.
|
||||
|
||||
==============================================================================
|
||||
4. Assumptions *design-assumptions*
|
||||
|
||||
Size of variables:
|
||||
char 8 bit signed
|
||||
char_u 8 bit unsigned
|
||||
int 32 or 64 bit signed (16 might be possible with limited features)
|
||||
unsigned 32 or 64 bit unsigned (16 as with ints)
|
||||
long 32 or 64 bit signed, can hold a pointer
|
||||
|
||||
Note that some compilers cannot handle long lines or strings. The C89
|
||||
standard specifies a limit of 509 characters.
|
||||
|
||||
vim:tw=78:ts=8:noet:ft=help:norl:
|
||||
|
@ -3991,6 +3991,8 @@ C change.txt /*C*
|
||||
C-editing tips.txt /*C-editing*
|
||||
C-indenting indent.txt /*C-indenting*
|
||||
C89 develop.txt /*C89*
|
||||
C90 develop.txt /*C90*
|
||||
C95 develop.txt /*C95*
|
||||
C99 develop.txt /*C99*
|
||||
COMSPEC starting.txt /*COMSPEC*
|
||||
CR-used-for-NL pattern.txt /*CR-used-for-NL*
|
||||
@ -5732,6 +5734,7 @@ PHP_outdentSLComments indent.txt /*PHP_outdentSLComments*
|
||||
PHP_outdentphpescape indent.txt /*PHP_outdentphpescape*
|
||||
PHP_removeCRwhenUnix indent.txt /*PHP_removeCRwhenUnix*
|
||||
PHP_vintage_case_default_indent indent.txt /*PHP_vintage_case_default_indent*
|
||||
POSIX.1-2001 develop.txt /*POSIX.1-2001*
|
||||
Partial eval.txt /*Partial*
|
||||
Pattern pattern.txt /*Pattern*
|
||||
Perl if_perl.txt /*Perl*
|
||||
@ -6170,6 +6173,9 @@ assert_notequal() testing.txt /*assert_notequal()*
|
||||
assert_notmatch() testing.txt /*assert_notmatch()*
|
||||
assert_report() testing.txt /*assert_report()*
|
||||
assert_true() testing.txt /*assert_true()*
|
||||
assumptions-C-compiler develop.txt /*assumptions-C-compiler*
|
||||
assumptions-makefiles develop.txt /*assumptions-makefiles*
|
||||
assumptions-variables develop.txt /*assumptions-variables*
|
||||
astro.vim syntax.txt /*astro.vim*
|
||||
asy.vim syntax.txt /*asy.vim*
|
||||
at motion.txt /*at*
|
||||
@ -10407,7 +10413,6 @@ style-changes develop.txt /*style-changes*
|
||||
style-clang-format develop.txt /*style-clang-format*
|
||||
style-comments develop.txt /*style-comments*
|
||||
style-common-functions develop.txt /*style-common-functions*
|
||||
style-compiler develop.txt /*style-compiler*
|
||||
style-declarations develop.txt /*style-declarations*
|
||||
style-examples develop.txt /*style-examples*
|
||||
style-functions develop.txt /*style-functions*
|
||||
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
||||
*version8.txt* For Vim version 9.1. Last change: 2022 Feb 26
|
||||
*version8.txt* For Vim version 9.1. Last change: 2025 Jul 21
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
VIM REFERENCE MANUAL by Bram Moolenaar
|
||||
@ -14558,7 +14558,7 @@ Changed *changed-8.1*
|
||||
-------
|
||||
|
||||
Internal: A few C99 features are now allowed such as // comments and a
|
||||
comma after the last enum entry. See |style-compiler|.
|
||||
comma after the last enum entry. See |assumptions-C-compiler|.
|
||||
|
||||
Since patch 8.0.0029 removed support for older MS-Windows systems, only
|
||||
MS-Windows XP and later are supported.
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user