From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, jtv <jtv@xs4all.nl>,
Vladimir Kondratiev <vladimir.kondratiev@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: __FUNCTION__
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:51:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C3B85E6.9634B180@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C3B664B.3060103@intel.com> <20020108220149.GA15816@kroah.com> <20020108235649.A26154@xs4all.nl> <20020108231147.GA16313@kroah.com>, <20020108231147.GA16313@kroah.com>; from greg@kroah.com on Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 03:11:47PM -0800 <20020109003901.T5235@khan.acc.umu.se>
David Weinehall wrote:
>
> ...
> > Since the C99 spec does not state anything about __FUNCTION__, changing
> > it from the current behavior does not seem like a wise thing to do.
> >
> > Any pointers to someone to complain to, or is there no chance for
> > reversal?
>
> Because the want people to stop using a gcc-specific way and start
> using the C99-mandated way instead?! Very sane imho.
>
They shouldn't take a GNU extension which has been offered
for ten years and suddenly revert it, or unoptionally spit a
warning. But they keep on doing this.
I've had large codebases which compiled just fine five years ago.
But with a current compiler, same codebase produces an *enormous*
number of warnings. There's no switch to turn them off and going
in and changing the code is clearly not an option. The only options
are to:
1: Not use the newer compiler
2: Grotty sed script to gobble the warnings
3: Fix the compiler.
I've done all three :(
-
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-08 23:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-08 21:36 __FUNCTION__ Vladimir Kondratiev
2002-01-08 21:59 ` __FUNCTION__ Ian S. Nelson
2002-01-08 22:17 ` __FUNCTION__ Greg KH
2002-01-08 23:09 ` __FUNCTION__ Vladimir Kondratiev
2002-01-08 22:01 ` __FUNCTION__ Greg KH
2002-01-08 22:56 ` __FUNCTION__ jtv
2002-01-08 23:11 ` __FUNCTION__ Greg KH
2002-01-08 23:39 ` __FUNCTION__ David Weinehall
2002-01-08 23:51 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-01-09 0:04 ` __FUNCTION__ David Weinehall
2002-01-09 0:14 ` __FUNCTION__ Andrew Morton
2002-01-09 0:23 ` __FUNCTION__ Anton Altaparmakov
2002-01-08 23:42 ` __FUNCTION__ jtv
2002-01-09 2:12 ` __FUNCTION__ Richard Henderson
2002-01-09 7:23 ` __FUNCTION__ Greg KH
2002-01-09 7:32 ` __FUNCTION__ Neil Booth
2002-01-09 22:35 ` __FUNCTION__ Richard Henderson
2002-01-09 9:05 ` __FUNCTION__ Martin Dalecki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C3B85E6.9634B180@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jtv@xs4all.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tao@acc.umu.se \
--cc=vladimir.kondratiev@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.