On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:53:03AM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: > [slightly off topic: GCCisms in Linux kernel] > > It contains *many* constructs that are not defined in, for > > example, C99, and it would in fact be impossible to write the Linux > > kernel using only C99-compliant constructs. > > True. On the other hand, it is possible to keep large parts of the > kernel independent of compiler implementation details. And it is not > only possible but also beneficial, e.g. because the compiler's > implementation changes over time.
I think the most important reason for portable code is that new readers are more familiar with effects of the code. -- Heikki Orsila Barbie's law: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Math is hard, let's go shopping!" http://www.iki.fi/shd - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
