David Woodhouse wrote:
>> The main problems are not really hard to fix......
>>
>> - Most problems eem to be related to the fact that Linux does not
>> use C-99 based types in the kernel and the related type definitions
>> are not written in plain C. This is something that should be fixed
>> with a source consolidation program or by defining aliases to
>> C-99 types in case the compiler is not GCC.
>
>
> The argument has been made that the standard C99 types are _optional_,
> and anything included from a C library's headers without _explicitly_
> being included by the user shouldn't define those types.
>
> Personally, I think that's a load of bollocks. And it certainly doesn't
> apply to Linux-specific files like <linux/cdrom.h>, which are perfectly
> entitled to use a C standard from last millennium, regardless of
> namespace 'pollution' issues. That's why we continue to use the crappy
> __u32 types. Can you be more specific about why this is a problem? Don't
> we mostly define those crappy types using arch-specific knowledge, as
> 'int', 'long', etc?
>
It definitely does hurt when using those types in files that may want to
be used by the C library (as opposed to the end user.)
However, there is no reason why there should be anything funny about the
declaration of those types.
-hpa
-
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/
