From: Jerry Van Baren <gerald.vanbaren@ge.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] use of C99
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:46:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49DCFF1D.6080006@ge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090408192832.8D48F8560EFB@gemini.denx.de>
Hi Wolfgang,
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Kumar Gala,
>
> In message <4A0B9AAA-4714-4C27-84A7-22FCE4D91DDA@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> I was wondering if there was any reason we avoid C99 features in u-
>> boot source.
>>
>> Specifically the ability to declare variables in the middle of
>> functions.
>
> One reason is that I consider such code extremely ugly and hard to
> read and understand.
ACK. I don't expect to see variables spring into life in the middle of
nowhere.
>> There are a slew of places that we have something like:
> ...
>> #ifdef CONFIG_COOL_FEATURE
>> u32 myvarrocks = foo * bar * bar;
>>
>> gd->neato = myvarrocks
>> #endif
>
> It would be even better to avoid such #ifdef's, or at least the need
> for such special local variables.
Sometimes (often?) that is impossible.
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
If I'm not confused, I've seen block-local u-boot variables, has the
advantages of being more distinctive and limits the lifetime of the
variable.
#ifdef CONFIG_COOL_FEATURE
{
u32 myvarrocks = foo * bar * bar;
gd->neato = myvarrocks
}
#endif
Is this an acceptable compromise?
Best regards,
gvb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-08 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-08 18:51 [U-Boot] use of C99 Kumar Gala
2009-04-08 19:28 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-08 19:46 ` Jerry Van Baren [this message]
2009-04-08 20:25 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 20:46 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-04-08 20:57 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 21:26 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-04-08 21:34 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 21:03 ` Ben Warren
2009-04-08 21:23 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-04-08 20:52 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-08 21:01 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 22:26 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-08 21:34 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-08 21:38 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 22:39 ` Graeme Russ
2009-04-08 22:45 ` Timur Tabi
2009-04-08 22:59 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-08 23:09 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-08 22:28 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-08 21:27 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-08 23:22 ` Larry Johnson
2009-04-08 23:40 ` Scott Wood
2009-04-09 4:27 ` Kumar Gala
2009-04-09 11:38 ` Jerry Van Baren
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-04-09 1:53 Pink Boy
2009-04-09 2:12 ` Jerry Van Baren
2009-04-09 5:50 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-04-09 13:27 ` Larry Johnson
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=49DCFF1D.6080006@ge.com \
--to=gerald.vanbaren@ge.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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