Re: standard for documenting conditional preprocessor directives?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 4 Sep 2007 10:13:30 +0000 (UTC) Oleg Verych wrote:

> * 27-08-2007
> 
> Randy,
> 
> []
> > Your example almost matches my preference/style, but there is no Linux
> > kernel "standard" for this AFAIK.
> 
> i've proposed all this some time ago, in order to simplify scripts, that
> strip __KERNEL__ in headers, and get rid of `unifdef`. I'm sure you've
> saw that in LKML. But you, as well known documentation supporter, didn't
> wrote proposition in English. Now you are saying "no standard". Who other
> than you can propose it?

Anyone can.  I just don't see a need for this particular one.


> []
> > ---
> > ~Randy
> > *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
> ____
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> Argh!!..


What?  any why does your email interface not use or support
reply-to-all?


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux