[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29623.1165853572@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 16:12:52 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>, akpm@...l.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Mark bitrevX() functions as const
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> wrote:
> > Mark the bit reversal functions as being const as they always return the
> > same output for any given input.
>
> Well, we should mark the argument const too, no?
The argument is just an integer; I'm not sure that marking it const actually
achieves anything, except to tell the function that it can't modify it - and
since it's effectively a copy, where's the fun in that.
> Does anythign actually improve from this? Also, we should actually use
> "__attribute_const__" instead (which works with other compilers), not the
> gcc'ism. That "__attribute__((const))" thing is a horrible syntax anyway
> (and has apparently slipped into <linux/log2.h> too - Damn.
Ah. I thought that was just for supporting old versions of gcc. I didn't
realise it was for handling strange compilers.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists