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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean