Re: [Ext-rt-dev] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Linux 2.6 Real Time Kernel

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:10:34 +0200, Thomas Gleixner said:

> What have we at the very end ? A endless mess of non understandable
> macros, which are resolved by compiler magic ? Where nobody can see on
> the first look, which kind of concurrency control you are using ? That's
> a nice thing to do some proof of concept implementation, but it can not
> be a solution for something what is targeted to go into mainline. The
> frequency of T4-T7 patches including the small fixes posted on LKML is
> just a proof of this.

I seem to remember Ingo saying that this *is* still somewhat "proof of concept",
and that the gcc preprocessor ad-crockery was just a *really* nice way of doing
it semi-automagically while minimizing the patch footprint and intrusiveness.

I'm sure that once we've got a non-moving target, at least 2 or 3 levels
of preprocessor redirection will get cleaned up and removed, to save
future programmer's sanity..

(Viewed alternatively - how many more flubs would the T4-T7 series have
if Ingo wasn't using the preprocessor to do the heavy lifting?  For something
at the current level of cookedness, it's doing fairly well)...

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature