Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 10:48:43 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why test for "__GNUC__"?
In-Reply-To: <20061029120534.GA4906@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610291044230.9726@localhost.localdomain>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610290610020.6502@localhost.localdomain>
 <Pine.LNX.4.61.0610291244310.15986@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610290742310.7457@localhost.localdomain>
 <20061029120534.GA4906@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 842
Lines: 26

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 07:44:18AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > p.s.  is there, in fact, any part of the kernel source tree that has a
> > preprocessor directive to identify the use of ICC?  just curious.
>
> Please, do
>
> 	ls include/linux/compiler-*

but according to compiler.h:

/* Intel compiler defines __GNUC__. So we will overwrite implementations
 * coming from above header files here
 */

so even ICC will define __GNUC__, which means that testing for
__GNUC__ is *still*, under the circumstances, redundant, isn't that
right?

rday
-
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/