On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:03:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > So the question IMHO isn't whether it's "valid C", because we already > have the Linux kernel's own C syntax variant and are enforcing it with > varying degrees of success. I'm not getting into the whole 'safe' fight here; but you're under selling things. We don't have a C syntax, we have a full blown C lanugeage variant. The 'Kernel C' that we write is very much not 'ANSI/ISO C' anymore in a fair number of places. And if I can get my way, we'll only diverge further from the standard. And this is quite separate from us using every GCC extention under the sun; which of course also doesn't help. It mostly has to do with us treating C as a portable assembler and the C people not wanting to commit to sensible things because they think C is a high-level language.
