Messages in this thread | | | From | Segher Boessenkool <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 16/16] fix handling of integer constant expressions | Date | Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:40:06 +0200 |
| |
>> Why? I'd say it's not better than BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO() use >> instead of that ?: > > Oh, _that_ part I have no problem with. It's more that it seems that > the > gcc optimization is ok at least as an extension.
Sure, but it's not an extension (yet), but an implementation side-effect; it would have to be (semi-formally) defined in the manual to be an extension. Until that happens, anyone using this "feature" risks haven his code broken at any time (or, rather, his code already was broken but he didn't know it).
See gcc.gnu.org/PR456 for more discussion. Yes it's an old bug...
Segher
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |