[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [IDEA+RFC] Possible solution for min()/max() war
    "A month of sundays ago David Weinehall wrote:"
    > On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 06:38:40PM +0200, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
    > > "Linus Torvalds wrote:"
    > > > What if the "int" happens to be negative?
    > >
    > > if sizeof(typeof(a)) != sizeof(typeof(b))
    > > BUG() // sizes differ
    > > const (typeof(a)) _a = ~(typeof(a))0
    > > const (typeof(b)) _b = ~(typeof(b))0
    > > if _a < 0 && _b > 0 || _a > 0 && b < 0
    > > BUG() // one signed, the other unsigned
    > > standard_max(a,b)
    > <disgusting vomit-sound>Do you really want code like that in the
    > kernel (yes, I know that there are code that can compete with it in

    Have you read it? Do you not realize That it optimizes down to BUG() or
    the standard min/max? By BUG(), I was hoping that somebody could
    produce some magic that doesn't even compile when it reduces to that,
    but maybe that's too much to hope for from gcc.

    > ugliness</disgusting vomit-sound>

    If that's the limit of the audiences intelligence, I don't think
    I'll bother bothering to think next time! I rather hoped instead
    for people to pick up the idea and tell me about the problem
    left to cover (void* ? what if the arch does not have 2's complement

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:01    [W:0.027 / U:5.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site