![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote: > This also means that by default we'd have no false positives at all, but > that there is a capable annotation method to reduce the amount of false > negatives, in a gradual and managable way - down to zero if everything > is annotated. Yeah, sounds much better to me. However, I am unable to figure out any real examples where we'd actually need the annotations for reasonably sane code. Do you have some in mind? Pekka - 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: 2006-06-13 08:15 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||