Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > What would be acceptable is something that understands C, and that can be
> > > used to follow these things. Like "tags".
> > I don't like hungarian notation too, but tags is out of question,
> > unfortunately. Too much preprocessor abuse in include/*/*.h.
> Notice the _like_ tags.
> Basically, what I'm saying is that I understand why people want to grep
> for specific uses, but I'm saying that a pure textual greap that doesn't
> understand the context is not an option - because it implies adding
> "cruft" to everything you want to grep for. Not for readability, but for
> And I'm saying that if people really want to do this, then use the
> computer to do it for you, having more than just "grep", and making your
> tools aware of it.
There is some facility allowing to implement this kind of things
in the C++ part of the most recent EGCS version which makes implementing
such things "relatively" easy - basiclly there is the provision to dump
the parser trees as easy to process ascii text already there.
Basically I think this dererr of syntactical analysis can only be
implementen by serious help from the compiler.
Maybe this is a new argument to facilitate at least correct syntactical
processing of the kernel by the C++ flavour of EGCS?
Please note that this wouldn't need to generate really executable code -
which as we all know is rather difficult due to the extensive runtime
support as well as ehm. the wired calling conventions C++ is oppressing
on the compiler... Just correct syntactical processing is all what's
this isn't THAT difficult to achive ;-).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:23 EST