On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 04:16:54PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 11:14:14AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > However, I disagree that "__u<size>" is the solution. This is only > > tradition, and NOT a standard. The genesis is that Linux started out > > as essentially "gcc only OS", and since gcc was the only real compiler, > > gcc-specific types are used. > > __uXX is in no way related to gcc. In this context it is. Programmers needed a fixed-sized type, and what gcc had was what they used, simply because other compilers were not relevant "back in the old days" WRT user-visible kernel headers. Traditionally only glibc and low-level Linux-driver-interaction packages like util-linux needed to care about this. Regardless, this historical tangent is irrelevant. The C language specifies fixed-size types, and __uXX is not it. Headers I have a say over will use the C standard types, and user-visible headers not using C standard fixed-size types I will continue to claim as non-standard. Feel free to disagree with me -- and the C standard -- but that's my position on this mess :) Jeff - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
