lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 21 Jun 2007 22:18:02 -0700
From"H. Peter Anvin" <>
SubjectRe: Linux Kernel include files
David Woodhouse wrote:
>> The main problems are not really hard to fix......
>>
>> -	Most problems eem to be related to the fact that Linux does not
>> 	use C-99 based types in the kernel and the related type definitions 
>> 	are not written in plain C. This is something that should be fixed
>> 	with a source consolidation program or by defining aliases to 
>> 	C-99 types in case the compiler is not GCC.
> 
> 
> The argument has been made that the standard C99 types are _optional_,
> and anything included from a C library's headers without _explicitly_
> being included by the user shouldn't define those types.
> 
> Personally, I think that's a load of bollocks. And it certainly doesn't
> apply to Linux-specific files like <linux/cdrom.h>, which are perfectly
> entitled to use a C standard from last millennium, regardless of
> namespace 'pollution' issues. That's why we continue to use the crappy
> __u32 types. Can you be more specific about why this is a problem? Don't
> we mostly define those crappy types using arch-specific knowledge, as
> 'int', 'long', etc?
> 

It definitely does hurt when using those types in files that may want to
be used by the C library (as opposed to the end user.)

However, there is no reason why there should be anything funny about the
declaration of those types.

	-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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-06-22 07:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2008