Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Nov 1998 11:01:46 +1300 | From | Chris Wedgwood <> | Subject | Re: [patch] my latest oom stuff |
| |
On Wed, Nov 11, 1998 at 04:58:55AM +0000, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> If we're going to do that, why don't we just go back to > > #define VM_SWAPCTL 1 > #define VM_SMAPOUT 2 > > ... the way Stephen originally coded it.... ?
enum's are (in theory) more rigid and presumably we make make gcc complain when people misuse them (ie. assuming an int or something to them).
Oh, anyone know if egcs will barf on this? (as it should)
{ enum blah { blah1,blah2 };
blah i;
for(i=0;i<10;++i);
}
-cw
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |