On Sunday 10 October 2010 13:41:59 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > 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. The clash of sparse headers with <stdbool.h> should be already fixed: http://git.kernel.org/?p=devel/sparse/sparse.git;a=commitdiff;h=0be55c9 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
