On 7/21/07, Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 03:21:43PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 7/21/07, Oleg Verych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 04:27:31AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > >[] > > >> if you want to make some micro optimization in the build install step, > > >> sure ... but functionally, the difference is irrelevant considering > > >> sed operates only on individual lines > > > > > >That was an attempt to support less sucking userspace in the kernel > > >development. More readable, more memory/cpu effective, more portable. > > > > while you could try and make a claim against memory/cpu effeciency, i > > fail to see how the first or last claims could possibly be backed up > > > > but again, if you feel that strongly about it, you're certainly free > > to post a patch > > I would much more prefer this functionality to be integrated into unifdef. > There is no good reason to have two different preprocesisng methonds, one > being the sed based one and the other the unidef one. > > A sinlge dedicated program that contian the sum of the functionality would > be faster too.
which functionality ? normalizing of whitespace or all these linux-specific hacks ? unifdef serves one specific function which is stated in its manpage: remove preprocessor conditionals from code. -mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
