From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/21] pack-bitmap: add support for bitmap indexes Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:47:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20131202204715.GA18842@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20131114124157.GA23784@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20131114124432.GJ10757@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87siuedhvj.fsf@thomasrast.ch> <20131202161208.GB24202@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Thomas Rast , git@vger.kernel.org, Vicent =?utf-8?B?TWFydMOt?= To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Dec 02 21:47:30 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VnaOr-0005aP-4w for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 21:47:25 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757115Ab3LBUrU (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:47:20 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:49245 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757164Ab3LBUrS (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:47:18 -0500 Received: (qmail 8635 invoked by uid 102); 2 Dec 2013 20:47:17 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 14:47:17 -0600 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:47:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 12:36:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I do wonder if at some point we should revisit our "do not use any > > C99-isms" philosophy. It was very good advice in 2005. I don't know how > > good it is over 8 years later (it seems like even ancient systems should > > be able to get gcc compiled as a last resort, but maybe there really are > > people for whom that is a burden). > > Well, we are not kernel where being able to precisely control > generated machine code matters and enforcement of acceptable > compiler versions to achieve that goal is warranted, so I'd prefer > to avoid anything that tells the users "go get a newer gcc". Sorry, I was not very clear about what I said. I do not think "go get a newer gcc" is a good thing to be telling people. But I wonder: a. if there are actually people on systems that have pre-c99 compilers in 2013 b. if there are, do they actually _use_ the ancient system compiler, and not just install gcc as the first step anyway? In other words, I am questioning whether we would have to tell anybody "go install gcc" these days. I'm not sure of the best way to answer that question, though. > There are certain things outside C89 that would make our code easier > to read and maintain (e.g. named member initialization of > struct/union, cf. ANSI C99 s6.7.9, just to name one) that I would > love to be able to use in our codebase, but being able to leave an > extra comma at the list of enums is very low on that list. Yes, I can live without trailing commas. I was musing more on the general issue (of course, we don't _have_ to take C99 as a whole, and can pick and choose features that even pre-C99 compilers got right, but I was wondering mainly when it would be time to say C99 is "old enough" that everybody supports it). -Peff