From: Tim Riker <Tim@Rikers.org>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: non-gcc linux?
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 13:00:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A01C7CD.C5AEB5B5@Rikers.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A01B8BB.A17FE178@Rikers.org> <E13rPhi-0001ng-00@the-village.bc.nu> <20001102201836.A14409@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3A01BDCD.FCBCFFF8@Rikers.org> <20001102205246.A17332@athlon.random>
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 12:17:33PM -0700, Tim Riker wrote:
> > [..] by adding gcc
> > syntax into it [..]
>
> I think that's the right path. How much would be hard for you to add gcc syntax
> into your compiler too instead of feeding us kernel patches? Note that it would
> be a big advantage also for userspace (not only kernel uses inline asm and
> other gcc extensions). And probably it would be an improvement to your
> compiler too (since I don't know of other compilers that are as smart as
> gcc in the inline asm syntax :).
>
> Andrea
I agree there is much that can be done by taking this path. Lineo is
also pursuing this with the compiler vendors. Along the same lines, a
vendor may choose to implement a gcc front end that translates gcc
syntax. All these options have merit.
However, it makes me a bit nervous to take this route. It assumes that
the way gcc does things is the "best way". A more formal route of adding
to the ANSI C standard would involve more eyes and therefore hopefully
add to the quality of what has been done solely for gcc.
This started off with some comments from the group (hpa in particular)
that even between gcc releases, the gcc extensions have been much less
stable that the standard compiler features. The danger of implementing
gcc extensions in another compiler is that these feature are solely
under the control of the gcc team. They are to a large degree
"documented as implemented" and as such can be difficult to determine
the Right Way to implement. The Good Things that are in gcc, that we
believe are implemented the Right Way should probably be added to the
ANSI C spec. The others should be avoided, especially when there is an
existing ANSI C way to do them.
--
Tim Riker - http://rikers.org/ - short SIGs! <g>
All I need to know I could have learned in Kindergarten
... if I'd just been paying attention.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-02 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-11-01 22:40 Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10 ? J . A . Magallon
2000-11-01 22:53 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 1:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 2:47 ` J . A . Magallon
2000-11-02 3:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 11:40 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 22:57 ` Kurt Garloff
2000-11-01 22:47 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 22:45 ` Gérard Roudier
2000-11-01 23:07 ` Ben Pfaff
2000-11-01 23:12 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 23:11 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 23:15 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-01 23:21 ` Tom Rini
2000-11-01 23:30 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 23:36 ` Tom Rini
2000-11-02 0:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 4:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2000-11-02 4:59 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-01 23:37 ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-01 23:29 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 23:54 ` Cort Dougan
2000-11-01 23:45 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 0:00 ` Cort Dougan
2000-11-02 0:54 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 0:21 ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-02 0:11 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 0:32 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-02 0:59 ` Bill Nottingham
2000-11-02 18:55 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Tim Riker
2000-11-02 19:07 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 19:07 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 19:24 ` Ben Ford
2000-11-02 19:31 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 20:37 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2000-11-02 20:53 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2000-11-02 21:21 ` non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
2000-11-04 11:30 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Kai Henningsen
2000-11-02 22:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2000-11-02 23:16 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-03 12:02 ` Martin Dalecki
2000-11-02 20:53 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 21:04 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 21:17 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 21:23 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-02 21:27 ` non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
2000-11-02 21:41 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-02 21:43 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-03 7:21 ` Gábor Lénárt
2000-11-04 11:39 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-04 11:37 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Kai Henningsen
2000-11-07 16:33 ` Jes Sorensen
2000-11-07 20:52 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-07 21:06 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-07 22:08 ` David Lang
2000-11-07 21:36 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-08 0:04 ` yodaiken
2000-11-02 19:18 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-02 19:17 ` non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
2000-11-02 19:52 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-11-02 20:00 ` Tim Riker [this message]
2000-11-02 20:29 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-11-02 22:23 ` D. Hugh Redelmeier
2000-11-02 22:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-03 22:02 ` D. Hugh Redelmeier
2000-11-04 5:34 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Aaron Sethman
2000-11-04 9:18 ` non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
2000-11-04 10:58 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-05 20:52 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-05 21:06 ` Jakub Jelinek
2000-11-05 21:18 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-05 22:42 ` Marc Lehmann
2000-11-05 23:05 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-06 0:05 ` Marc Lehmann
2000-11-06 8:53 ` Thomas Pornin
2000-11-05 23:26 ` Ion Badulescu
2000-11-06 6:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2000-11-05 22:46 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-05 22:45 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-05 22:52 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-04 12:20 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-06 17:14 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Ralf Baechle
2000-11-02 20:21 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-02 20:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2000-11-04 12:24 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-05 3:28 ` Michael Meissner
2000-11-05 13:03 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-03 11:33 ` Thomas Pornin
2000-11-04 11:19 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-02 2:42 ` Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10 ? Marc Lehmann
2000-11-02 21:24 ` Gérard Roudier
2000-11-02 22:37 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 6:28 ` Jakub Jelinek
2000-11-02 0:11 ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-02 0:06 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 0:22 ` Tom Rini
2000-11-02 0:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 0:56 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 0:17 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-11-02 0:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 1:01 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-11-01 23:04 ` George
2000-11-02 1:08 ` Jan Dvorak
2000-11-01 23:12 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-11-04 4:25 non-gcc linux? Bryan Sparks
[not found] <fa.fvk85sv.1oigpiv@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.cq7bdsv.gggbio@ifi.uio.no>
2000-11-06 0:34 ` Russ Allbery
2000-11-06 1:01 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-06 23:14 ` Adam Sampson
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=3A01C7CD.C5AEB5B5@Rikers.org \
--to=tim@rikers.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox