On Sam, 2010-10-09 at 14:46 -0700, Christopher Li wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It seems reasonable to avoid the use of C++ keywords in Sparse *headers*
> > (though unnecessary in *source*). Looks like this will primarily cause
> > pain due to "enum namespace" and the various places using it. Seems
> > easy enough to change those all to "ns". "new" mostly seems to get used
> > as a parameter name or local variable name; for the former we could omit
> > it, and for the latter we could trivially call it something more
> > specific like "newlist" or "newptr".
> >
> > So, I'd tend to guess "patches welcome" (again, for headers only, plus
> > minimal corresponding source changes when required). I wouldn't
> > anticipate other Sparse developers objecting strongly, but if they do
> > your mail seems like the right way to find out. The various reasons
> > given for *not* making the Linux kernel headers compatible don't seem to
> > apply here, though.
>
> Well said. I don't expect sparse to compile in the C++ mode. Making
> sparse header usable in C++ seems reasonable to me.
Well, sparse uses C99.
If one #include's <stdbool.h> at some day (as I did;-), than "true" and
"false" don't work any longer that good as variable names.
Are (trivial) patches to simply rename them appreciated?
Bernd
--
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
--
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
