Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:01:16 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: dl9pf@gmx.de, Behan Webster <behanw@converseincode.com>,
        David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>,
        Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>,
        ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: LLVMLinux: Remove nested functions from
 Thinkpad ACPI
Message-ID: <20140212220116.GR18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <1392238726-18787-1-git-send-email-dl9pf@gmx.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402121351510.27082@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402121351510.27082@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:54:43PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:

> So this patch is only as a courtesy to clang and you're not complaining 
> about things like __builtin() functions, typeof, or a ? : b conditional 
> operators because clang happens to support them?

That patch removes a disgusting construct; who cares how they'd discovered
it?  Consider it courtesy to reviewers, clang or no clang...

Folks, it's C; no need to bring Pascal misfeatures in, even if gcc happens
to accept them.
--
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/