From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:45:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from aux-209-217-49-36.oklahoma.net ([209.217.49.36]:23827 "EHLO proteus.paralogos.com") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23830644AbYKVKpE (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:45:04 +0000 Received: from [192.168.236.58] ([217.109.65.213]) by proteus.paralogos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA13611; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:43:50 -0600 Message-ID: <4927E2A4.5000702@paralogos.com> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:44:52 -0600 From: "Kevin D. Kissell" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geert Uytterhoeven CC: Chad Reese , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: Is there no way to shared code with Linux and other OSes? References: <4927C34F.4000201@caviumnetworks.com> <4927D6E0.4020009@paralogos.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 21385 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: kevink@paralogos.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Sat, 22 Nov 2008, Kevin D. Kissell wrote: > >> [This should be good for some useless weekend flaming.] >> > > Yeah! ;-) > > >> Chad Reese wrote: >> Don't blame Chad for this quote, it was me! >> to move away from such arbitrary dogmatism. The argument given for banning >> typedefs altogether is that nested typedefs are confusing to programmers. I >> > > I thought the main reason was that you can't have forward declarations of > typedefs, while you can have for structs. > That's a better argument than the one in the HTML version of Documentation/CodingStyle.txt that I had bookmarked (which was what I cited). Interestingly, if I look at the *current* Linux Documentation/CodingStyle.txt for 2.6.28-rc6, the blanket interdiction of typedefs is no longer there! Things *have* evolved, as I said they'd have to, to recognize 5 (a good Illuminati number) cases where typedefs are permitted. Superficially, based on Chad's description (I admit that I haven't been reviewing his patches) the Cavium case would seem to fall into the first category. Is the MIPS Linux community now some kind of ultra-orthodox sub-sect of the Linux cult? ;o) Regards, Kevin K.