[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0703101229090.15510@shell4.speakeasy.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:36:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Trent Piepho <xyzzy@...akeasy.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use more gcc extensions in the Linux headers
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Well, since Rusty's macro was hoddible *anyway*, I don't think I'd apply
> it as-is. Breaking icc for something that ugly and not-very-important
> simply makes no sense.
>
> There are better ways to do this.
>
> For one, you could (and should!) abstract these kinds of things out,
> rather than put them in another macro that really does something totally
> different. Then, the macro could have become
>
> #define ARRAY_SIZE (sizeof_expression + 0*error_if_not_array)
/* Error if X is a pointer, 0 otherwise */
#define ERROR_IF_POINTER(x) \
sizeof(int[-__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(x), typeof(&x[0]))])
/* Warning (div by zero) if x is a pointer, 0 otherwise */
#define WARN_IF_POINTER(x) \
(0/!__builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(x), typeof(&x[0])))
The gcc docs say __builtin_types_compatible_p returns 1 or 0, so the !!
isn't necessary. And my gcc at least returns 0 for sizeof(int[0]).
-
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