lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Patch] 2.5.70-bk9 kick FAR out of the zlib
    Linus should have a firm position already, pruned from CC:.

    On Thu, 5 June 2003 16:17:52 -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
    > On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, [iso-8859-1] Jörn Engel wrote:
    >
    > > A while back:
    > >
    > > On Fri, 30 May 2003 14:38:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > > > On Fri, 30 May 2003, Jörn Engel wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > How about an all or nothing approach? If you really want to get rid
    > > > > of K&R, change indentation as well, rip out some of the rather
    > > > > tasteless macros (ZEXPORT, ZEXPORTVA, ZEXTERN, FAR, ...) and so on.
    > > >
    > > > I'd love to, but I suspect we lack the motivation to do so, and there
    > > > aren't any obvious upsides. Yes, the code is ugly, but it's also fairly
    > > > stable so people seldom need to look at it.

    Please let the above sink in a moment.

    > But you just removed the portability hooks. The current code worked
    > in DOS, on Windows, etc., as will as Linux. This means that if some-
    > body, as unlikely as it may seem, develops a better/quicker
    > version using M$ Visual C/C++, you can't get a patch. In particular,
    > FAR is your friend. A simple #define makes it disappear when you
    > are not using a segmented architecture, but allows the use of
    > large arrays when you are.
    >
    > These kinds of things don't make the code 'pure'. It just prevents
    > future enhancements. Look in the 'C' header files and see all the
    > macros that disappear under the right conditions. Would you
    > justify getting rid of __P in those headers? If not, please don't
    > eliminate FAR.

    My words were "all or nothing". Linus was against nothing, so the
    answer is all, that simple.

    As to your "someone comes up with a better zlib" concern, this has
    happened already. An guess what, we ignored it. So unless you come
    up with a patch to get the 1.1.4 changes into the kernel and describe
    what the two magic bits are all about, I couldn't care less.

    Jörn

    --
    But this is not to say that the main benefit of Linux and other GPL
    software is lower-cost. Control is the main benefit--cost is secondary.
    -- Bruce Perens
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:4.271 / U:0.684 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site