Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:44:58 +0200 | From | Martin Dalecki <> |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > > > > > > What would be acceptable is something that understands C, and that can be > > > used to follow these things. Like "tags". > > > > I don't like hungarian notation too, but tags is out of question, > > unfortunately. Too much preprocessor abuse in include/*/*.h. > > Notice the _like_ tags. > > Basically, what I'm saying is that I understand why people want to grep > for specific uses, but I'm saying that a pure textual greap that doesn't > understand the context is not an option - because it implies adding > "cruft" to everything you want to grep for. Not for readability, but for > greppability. > > And I'm saying that if people really want to do this, then use the > computer to do it for you, having more than just "grep", and making your > tools aware of it.
There is some facility allowing to implement this kind of things in the C++ part of the most recent EGCS version which makes implementing such things "relatively" easy - basiclly there is the provision to dump the parser trees as easy to process ascii text already there.
Basically I think this dererr of syntactical analysis can only be implementen by serious help from the compiler.
Maybe this is a new argument to facilitate at least correct syntactical processing of the kernel by the C++ flavour of EGCS?
Please note that this wouldn't need to generate really executable code - which as we all know is rather difficult due to the extensive runtime support as well as ehm. the wired calling conventions C++ is oppressing on the compiler... Just correct syntactical processing is all what's neccessary - this isn't THAT difficult to achive ;-). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |