On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 11:17:05PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 02:31:55PM -0800, Christopher Li wrote: > > I'm not sure. __transparent_union__ is an atrocious kludge and it does > deserve a warning. So getting it to STFU on known offenders we have no > chance to fix is OK, but legitimizing that abortion is not. I did not mean to legitimizing it. I just don't want to silence suppress this kind of warnings. > Unlike __transparent_union__, restrict is at least a valid C... It's not > that hard to handle, except for the shortage of bits for modifiers... I have a patch free up the specials bits in modifiers. It helps a little bit. But I think we need a attribute pointer in ctype to fit more attributes eventually. Chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
