On 10/03/2019 22.30, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> and BUILD_BUG is bad). Once everything is converted to static_assert(),
That will never happen, because the two are not interchangeable
[ignoring the churn it would involve]. BUILD_BUG_ON can eat expressions
which static_assert won't (e.g. BUILD_BUG_ON
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 10:19:37PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 10/03/2019 11.51, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > Userspace places static_assert() macro at
> >
>
> So? That seems a rather weak argument. We have lots of interfaces that
> also exist in userspace which are not declared in similar
On 10/03/2019 11.51, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> Userspace places static_assert() macro at
>
So? That seems a rather weak argument. We have lots of interfaces that
also exist in userspace which are not declared in similar-named headers
(e.g. we have no stdio.h, which is where snprintf lives). Not t
Userspace places static_assert() macro at
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan
---
include/assert.h | 19 +++
include/linux/build_bug.h | 19 ---
include/linux/fs.h|2 +-
lib/vsprintf.c|1 +
4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2
4 matches
Mail list logo