lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectC99 types VS Linus types
    Date
    Hello,

    before a standard was set, every single OS had to come up with its
    own fancy fixed-size type definitions such as DWORD, ULONG, u32,
    CARD32, u_int32_t and so on.

    Since C99, the C language has acquired a standard set of machine
    independent types that can be used for machine independent
    fixed-width declarations.

    Getting rid of all non-ISO types from kernel code could be a
    desiderable long-term goal. Besides the inexplicable goodness
    of standards compliance, my favourite argument is that not
    depending on custom definitions makes copying code from/to
    other projects a little easier.

    Ok, "int32_t" is a little more typing than "s32_t", but in
    exchange you get it syntax hilighted in vim like built-in
    types ;-)

    I suggest a soft approach: trying to use C99 types as much
    as possible for new code and only converting old code to
    C99 when it's not too much trouble.

    I hope it doesn't turn into an endless flame war... This is
    just a polite suggestion.

    --
    // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
    \X/ http://www.develer.com/

    Please don't send Word attachments - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

    -
    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: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.022 / U:29.520 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site