Hi! > > This is not just a matter of style; this is a matter of semantics, > > especially with regard to: > > > > * const Correctness. > > A const-declared variable must be initialized when defined. > > > > * Conditional Compilation. > > When there is complex interaction between compile-time > > configuration options, it's essential to be able to > > make declarations where needed; otherwise unnecessary > > gymnastics are required to silence the compiler. > > > > Gentleman... Just let people say exactly what they mean to say. .. > You obviously need every bit of help in that task, judging by the amount > of clarity (or thoughts, for that matter) visible in the spew above... > > NAK. And as for letting people say exactly what they mean to say... > I am tempted to take you on that invitation, but that would be cruel > to gregkh - he would have to reply to inevitable screeds about > CoC-violating postings on l-k. We should really get rid of CoC, because I'd really like to see you _not_ resist that temptation. But... he's right. With rust-like programming style with widespread consts, this warning has to go. And it is causing additional/ugly #ifdefs in some cases. Maybe author can show examples in kernel .c where disabling the warning would lead to nicer code. I believe we should give it a try. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
