Author: ed
Date: Tue Jan 19 15:31:18 2010
New Revision: 202628
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/202628
Log:
Recommit r193732:
Remove __gnu89_inline.
Now that we use C99 almost everywhere, just use C99-style in the pmap
code. Since the pmap code is the only consumer
On Jan 19, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Ed Schouten wrote:
Author: ed
Date: Tue Jan 19 15:31:18 2010
New Revision: 202628
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/202628
Log:
Recommit r193732:
Remove __gnu89_inline.
Now that we use C99 almost everywhere, just use C99-style in the
pmap
Hi Scott,
* Scott Long sco...@samsco.org wrote:
Ok, so you've broken a legitimate piece of compatibility. What's the
gain?
That we no longer have a blend of GNU and ISO C inline throughout our
entire source tree, making the code more accessible for alternative
compilers.
--
Ed Schouten
On Jan 19, 2010, at 8:59 AM, Ed Schouten wrote:
Hi Scott,
* Scott Long sco...@samsco.org wrote:
Ok, so you've broken a legitimate piece of compatibility. What's the
gain?
That we no longer have a blend of GNU and ISO C inline throughout our
entire source tree, making the code more
on 19/01/2010 17:31 Ed Schouten said the following:
It was backed out, because it prevented us from building kernels using a
7.x compiler.
Ed,
could you please clarify this part?
It seems that we have the same compiler in 7/8/9.
--
Andriy Gapon
* Scott Long sco...@samsco.org wrote:
Which compilers? Is this a requirement for CLANG? Or is it just a
nice-to-have clean-up?
Clang's support for the gnu89 inline semantics works sometimes, while
there have been many regressions over time where fixes related to the
ISO C99 inlining broke the
Hi Andriy,
* Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
could you please clarify this part?
It seems that we have the same compiler in 7/8/9.
Well, not entirely. They do share the same version number, but back in
March last year, das@ backported ISO C99 inlining from a GPLv2 licensed
snapshot of GCC
Scott Long sco...@samsco.org writes:
Ok, so you've broken a legitimate piece of compatibility. What's the
gain?
GCC had inline functions long before they were added to the C standard.
Inline functions were introduced in C99 with different semantics (and
believe me, that was not a gratuitous
on 19/01/2010 18:37 Ed Schouten said the following:
Hi Andriy,
* Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
could you please clarify this part?
It seems that we have the same compiler in 7/8/9.
Well, not entirely. They do share the same version number, but back in
March last year, das@
on 19/01/2010 19:04 Ed Schouten said the following:
* Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
So perhaps that should be done as well?
Well, I'd say it would be a useful thing to MFC, but I can't really
judge how big the impact is, like whether it breaks anything in Ports.
There should be some
__gnu89_inline was the only way to write a program with non-static
inline functions that would compile and link both with older versions
of gcc, and with newer versions of gcc in C99 mode. This is because
gcc in 8.x (as well as Clang and gcc 4.3+ from ports) use C99 inline
semantics in the c99
11 matches
Mail list logo
