From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 18:55:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 18:55:28 -0400 Received: from jalon.able.es ([212.97.163.2]:10192 "EHLO jalon.able.es") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 18:55:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:55:38 +0200 From: "J . A . Magallon" To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Alexander Stohr , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.10-pre9 min/max raises "const" warnings Message-ID: <20010915005538.A1589@werewolf.able.es> In-Reply-To: <761E23C7F09AD51188990008C74C26141221@fgl00exh01.atitech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT In-Reply-To: ; from schwab@suse.de on Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 20:55:08 +0200 X-Mailer: Balsa 1.2.pre3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 20010914 Andreas Schwab wrote: >Alexander Stohr writes: > >|> i am yet not sure if the used "? :" operator set does qualify as >|> a left-value. > >For Standard C it isn't, but for GNU C it is. > Perhaps it is nonsense, but, as the kernel already uses gcc-specific features, the gcc folks could extend to C th '?' operators from C++, so #define max(a,b) (a >? b) #define min(a,b) (a