> > Even though I _am_ one of those weirdos that would love to > sparse+something become the official kernel compiler -- many years from > now -- I think that they are best kept separate. > > sparse -does- serve as "libsparse" to a few independent projects, and > the current sparse/kernel has clear benefits for those projects. Being > a separate project helps keep sparse small, simple, focused and > portable, IMO. "housing" the source inside the kernel source tree should not be an excuse to make this kernel only. It should rather expose the source. And then people could extend sparse and say that they contributes to the linux kernel. Maybe that could make it more sexy. I at least does not see that housing the source inside the kernel automatically will make it kernel only. But I on the other hand are sure we will see additional contributions / improvements and extended use. Having sparse inside the kernel is therefore in no way a blocker for smatch, or Jeff's x86 compilter toy. Sam -- 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
