Messages in this thread | | | From | (John Alvord) | Subject | Re: [IDEA+RFC] Possible solution for min()/max() war | Date | Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:06:23 GMT |
| |
On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:10:12 +0100 (BST), Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> Or, with the 2.4.9 approach, it's just a single macro (well, and another >> one for "max()"). And when somebody needs a new type, he doesn't have to >> worry about creating a new instantiation of the macro. > >The unfortunate thing is that its min and max as opposed to typed_min and >typed_max (with min/max set up to error), since its now a nightmare to >maintain compatibility between two allegedly stable releases of the same >kernel, as well as with 2.2 > >Had it been typed_min(a,b,c) then 2.2 could have stayed compatible and the >glue would have been simple
Does the new min/max definitions hurt portability to and from Linux?
john alvord - 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/
| |