On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> If we can stomach it the effect is nice, but the version which simply
> allows pointer correctness (rather than trying to do unsigned long too) is
> less bletcherous.
I'd suggest trying to get by with just the pointer version for now. But we
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 10:57:03 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Attempt to create callbacks which take unsigned long as well as
> > correct pointer types.
>
> I bow down before you.
>
> I thought I had done some rather horrible things with gcc built-ins and
Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ===
> Attempt to create callbacks which take unsigned long as well as
> correct pointer types.
FWIW i had something similar using the gcc union extension at some
point for ioctls because I was tired for all the ugly casts from
unsigned long arg to void *
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> Attempt to create callbacks which take unsigned long as well as
> correct pointer types.
I bow down before you.
I thought I had done some rather horrible things with gcc built-ins and
macros, but I hereby hand over my crown to you.
As my daughter
On Monday 21 January 2008 23:38:47 Tejun Heo wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Monday 21 January 2008 09:17:30 Rusty Russell wrote:
> >> But it would be cool to allow functions which take an unsigned long.
> >> I'll test this out and see what I can make...
> >
> > I think this comes under "too u
Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Monday 21 January 2008 09:17:30 Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> What should be do are
>>>
>>> * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *.
>> For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignab
On Monday 21 January 2008 09:17:30 Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote:
> > What should be do are
> >
> > * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *.
>
> For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignable
> to a void *, so yo
On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote:
> What should be do are
>
> * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *.
For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignable to
a void *, so you get a warning if you use a non-pointer already.
But it would be c
Tejun Heo wrote:
> * Passing NULL as data to callback which takes non-void pointer
> triggers warning. I think this should be allowed. Something like
> the following?
Please ignore the last sentence.
> * Allowing non-pointer integral types which fit into pointer would be
> nice. It's oft
Rusty Russell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>Converting to and from void * for callback functions loses type safety:
> everywhere else we expect the compiler to catch incorrect pointer types
> handed to functions.
>
>It's pretty simple to create typesafe callback functions using typeof, and
> wit
Hi all,
Converting to and from void * for callback functions loses type safety:
everywhere else we expect the compiler to catch incorrect pointer types
handed to functions.
It's pretty simple to create typesafe callback functions using typeof, and
with a little gcc trickery we can allow
11 matches
Mail list logo
