Al Viro wrote:- > > I think it was a common extension for some strange operating systems > > (read: VMS), where system symbols have "$" embedded in the name. So you'd > > have names like "sys$function()" for system functions. > > > > It's possible others did it too - gcc says it's "traditional", but the > > only case I've seen it is from VMS (and thus from DEC->Compaq->HP C > > compilers). > > > > But I certainly wouldn't object to sparse supporting it, although I would > > suggest that it at least warn by default. > > The question is how do they treat $ in preprocessor tokens. Is it a full > equivalent of letter? I.e. is $x a valid identifier? If it is, that's Apparently yes: http://h30097.www3.hp.com/docs/base_doc/DOCUMENTATION/V50_HTML/ARH9NATE/DOCU_026.HTM My personal opinion is we don't want to encourage $ in identifiers, and so I'd urge you to drop the idea :). Too many poor mis-featured extensions in GCC already. At least if you do go ahead it seems the implementation is trivial (assembler aside). Neil. - 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
