Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:51:24 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: const versus __attribute__((const)) |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>In some ways, this is rather unfortunate, too. What it really means is >>that the gcc "m" constraint is overloaded; it would have been better if >>they would have created a new modifier (say "*") for "must be lvalue." > > > The thing is, most users of "m" (like 99%) actually mean "_THIS_ memory > location". So just fixing the "m" modifier was an easy way to make sure > that users get the behaviour they expect. >
Agreed. It's just a bit ugly that the "m" in "rm" has a different meaning than just "m".
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |