On Sunday 13 of September 2009 21:55:32 Christopher Li wrote: > On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Kamil Dudka <kdudka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Any progress here? I wouldn't like this to become another downstream > > patch. > > Guilty. Too busy this week. I am going to take a look at it again tonight. Thanks for quick reply! It doesn't hurry actually. I am only trying to keep this thread alive :-) > > I work on a generic layer [1] for processing C sources (for now) > > supporting SPARSE and gcc 4.5 plug-in as sources. The gcc plug-in [2] now > > works fairly well and I am going to make the SPARSE client fully > > equivalent to the plug-in. This will probably need a few more tiny > > patches for SPARSE to implement what's missing. > > > > Is the upstream interested to make SPARSE more useful as a library? > > Yes. I am interested in that. If it does not cause additional slow down > or memory blow. Sure yes. > > If it does because it needs to preserve more information, e.g. space and > comments it would be nice to put it under some options or even compile time > config option. I care about people don't use those feature can still run > sparse fast. I think we'll need to add some extra items to the public SPARSE headers, not sure if it's good idea to #ifdef it even there. But I need to analyse what exactly is missing first. Now I am only asking whether the idea itself is welcome (before starting work on it). Kamil -- 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
