Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
In article 20140218222457.ga1...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:54:34PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name: src Committed By:christos Date:Tue Feb 18 20:54:34 UTC 2014 Modified Files: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib: int_util.h Log Message: prefer __func__ instead of __FUNCTION__ Can we please avoid cosmetic local changes? Do we want portable code or not? And if we can't improve the local code what's the point of importing it? christos
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
In article 20140218222555.gb1...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:53:44PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name: src Committed By:christos Date:Tue Feb 18 20:53:44 UTC 2014 Modified Files: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib: int_util.c Log Message: - include sys/cdefs.h for compiler definitions - add a lint comment Please revert this, it doesn't add value and it makes it harder to deal with prestine upstream. More importantly, please bring up such changes upstream first. What's the upstream? In this particular case we depend on sys/cdefs.h to define __attribute__() and other extensions properly for compilers that don't have it. How else do you propose to fix it? Or are you saying everything needs to support all the gcc/clang extensions? christos
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 03:52:58PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: In article 20140218222555.gb1...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:53:44PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name: src Committed By: christos Date: Tue Feb 18 20:53:44 UTC 2014 Modified Files: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib: int_util.c Log Message: - include sys/cdefs.h for compiler definitions - add a lint comment Please revert this, it doesn't add value and it makes it harder to deal with prestine upstream. More importantly, please bring up such changes upstream first. What's the upstream? In this particular case we depend on sys/cdefs.h to define __attribute__() and other extensions properly for compilers that don't have it. How else do you propose to fix it? Or are you saying everything needs to support all the gcc/clang extensions? What mysterious compilers are you talking about? Joerg
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 03:50:03PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: In article 20140218222457.ga1...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:54:34PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name: src Committed By: christos Date: Tue Feb 18 20:54:34 UTC 2014 Modified Files: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib: int_util.h Log Message: prefer __func__ instead of __FUNCTION__ Can we please avoid cosmetic local changes? Do we want portable code or not? And if we can't improve the local code what's the point of importing it? I have no problem with going over the code in the upstream repository, but I have a problem with adding pointless local changes. They just increase the cost of maintainance for absolute no good reason. Joerg
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
In article 20140219205453.gb22...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: I have no problem with going over the code in the upstream repository, but I have a problem with adding pointless local changes. They just increase the cost of maintainance for absolute no good reason. There is a semantic difference here between the two, aside from __FUNCTION__ not being in any standard. Do you think that the change is controvercial? christos
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/external/bsd/compiler_rt/dist/lib
On Feb 19, 2014, at 2:40 PM, Christos Zoulas chris...@astron.com wrote: In article 20140219205453.gb22...@britannica.bec.de, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: I have no problem with going over the code in the upstream repository, but I have a problem with adding pointless local changes. They just increase the cost of maintainance for absolute no good reason. There is a semantic difference here between the two, aside from __FUNCTION__ not being in any standard. Do you think that the change is controvercial? I've held off on committing local changes and worked with Joerg to feed things upstream first. It's been fairly painless.
