From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
Tom Spink <tspink@gmail.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: merge nmi_32-64 to nmi.c
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 21:13:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48307FC0.8010704@firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <483076FA.9040605@goop.org>
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>> The whole idea was pretty bad. Ifdefs are not ugly because the syntax
>> looks ugly, but because it's a semantically ugly construct with bad
>> maintainability impact.
>>
>> Trying to put syntactical sugar around that is a doomed exercise. It
>> will be still ugly, no matter what you do.
>
> Not true. Using C rather than CPP to control the compilation of config
> options has the big win that all code paths are still visible to the
> compiler.
A small win. Still lots of other problems, including testing.
In some cases that's not what you want, but it often is, and
> it would avoid some degree if inadvertent breakage of options. It can
> also be syntactically a lot more pleasant.
Well it's still an unnecessary different code path and making
it look nicer is just an excuse from properly cleaning it up.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-18 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-17 19:22 [RFC] x86: merge nmi_32-64 to nmi.c Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-17 20:28 ` Tom Spink
2008-05-17 20:52 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-05-17 21:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-18 7:25 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-18 7:38 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 8:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-18 8:47 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 9:13 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-18 9:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 18:08 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-18 18:13 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-18 18:35 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-18 19:13 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-05-19 14:27 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 18:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-18 19:29 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-18 19:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-18 18:38 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-05-18 20:40 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-18 10:15 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-18 10:20 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 10:25 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-18 10:29 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 12:07 ` Tom Spink
2008-05-18 12:10 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-17 21:48 ` Mikael Pettersson
2008-05-17 22:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-18 6:24 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 10:04 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-18 10:09 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-19 18:07 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-19 18:41 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-05-21 7:41 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
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=48307FC0.8010704@firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tspink@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox