linux-sparse-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx schrieb am 18.05.2007 22:47:35: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 01:43:11PM +0200, Thomas Schmid wrote: > > 1. Symbolnames with "$" are accepted by gcc but not by sparse > > ewww... It's not hard to change, but I strongly recommend making it > ifdefed and *not* included on sane boxen. Rationale: that affects one > of the hottest paths in the entire thing. > > Who uses $ in identifiers, anyway, when it's guaranteed to be non-portable? > gcc accepts it as a bloody misguided extension, but it's not standard C by > any stretch of imagination. What are you working with, a bunch of old code > originating on VMS? > > > 2. #include "..\plc.h" is accepted by gcc but not by sparse => "\" is > > interpreted as escape- character > > 3. #include "D:\plc.h" is accepted by gcc but not by sparse > > *argh* ;-) Really that bad? > > sparse takes a shortcut - it treats header-name as string-literal. In > principle, these are distinct tokens. We could try to change that, but... > that makes tokenizer context-dependent in a fairly upleasant way. > > Note that \ in header-name is explicitly undefined behaviour (6.4.7(3)), > and compilers I've seen on weird systems of that kind tend to remap / on \ > in header names anyway before trying to look for files to include. The code which I like to use sparse with, is some sort of living 3rd party thing. I fear, these are not the only "misguided extensions" used, which work with cygwin GCC 2.95.3. I also tried to pre-process that code with cpp - but then I lose the position-data of the declarations i try to get info from. It's not possible to use cpp integrated in sparse, isn't it? Best regards Thomas Schmid - 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
