25 Jan
2011
25 Jan
'11
7:19 p.m.
Hello Holger,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:51:02 +0100, "Holger Hans Peter Freyther"
<holger(a)freyther.de> wrote:
Almost perfect. I can apply and modify myself or you could do two things. We
tend to avoid the '//' comments, they were only added in C99 and used to be a
GCC extension for C.
This is a good one ;-) One of the biggest problems when I tried a long
time ago to compile any of OpenBSC or OsmocomBB with a different compiler
than GCC were designated initializer which are _heavily_ used all over the
sources (I don't question their advantage, I only mention it). They are
a C99 feature (besides the library function snprintf() in the patch you
commented). So I would not care about the '//', this was the smallest
problem I had when I did my porting experiment (in fact the compilers
I am aware of silently accept it).
Just out of interest, do we really want to to avoid C99 ? I know there
is this implicit "kernel style" coding rule, does it include C99 ?
Please note that I don't want to discuss this, I use GCC from
Cygwin and can find workarounds for Linux specific issues on Windows
on my own, so I don't care that much. I am just interested in the
reasons for using C99 or not.
Best regards,
Dieter
--
Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de