Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 7 Nov 2000 16:06:28 -0500 (EST) | From | "Richard B. Johnson" <> | Subject | Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) |
| |
On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Tim Riker wrote:
> Jes, > > Hey how's Itanium been lately? > > As was mentioned before, there are nonproprietary compilers around as > well that might be good choices. My point is that the ANSI C steering > committee is probably a more balanced forum to determine C syntax than > the gcc team. We should adopt c99 syntax where feasible, for example. I > am not asking anyone to use a proprietary compiler of they do not choose > to do so. >
But we __do__ use c99 syntax wherever possible. However, not all of the kernel can be written strictly in 'C'. We need to use some assembly language for the hardware-specific stuff. Gcc provides those capabilities. We also need to control the alignment of some structure members because networking, SCSI, and a few other links to the outside world count on that. Gcc provides this capability also. It's a damn good tool.
Cheers, Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.0 on an i686 machine (799.54 BogoMips).
"Memory is like gasoline. You use it up when you are running. Of course you get it all back when you reboot..."; Actual explanation obtained from the Micro$oft help desk.
- 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/
|  |