Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933113AbXEDPXV (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 11:23:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933114AbXEDPXV (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 11:23:21 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.238]:45751 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933113AbXEDPXT (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 11:23:19 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=mSeSGULQitWDjZthbPcmhqVaNZZTkHrtC2qem3VV5SymWK23ja38RPZUDWb97nct3zvOfTwdJ0iyn86qWsBf4mlVukIspBcUqJVTSo8/+0cLGYJ+AsAgY7hPNWTqHglgD9Wjkn4xaXs8NjL2kHsmBG0ahC7pTxqzGj+tKx3APyA= Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 23:27:52 +0800 From: WANG Cong To: la deng Cc: Jan Engelhardt , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: c 's OOP in VFS vs c++'s OOP Message-ID: <20070504152752.GB4258@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: WANG Cong Mail-Followup-To: la deng , Jan Engelhardt , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <99e4df080705040132m41116db3y50c73c79528d6206@mail.gmail.com> <20070504101129.GA5482@localhost.localdomain> <99e4df080705040400p66819117sec7f7d88d3794871@mail.gmail.com> <20070504123047.GA2255@localhost.localdomain> <99e4df080705040653l38daa61aw3883b7c55c8e9de7@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <99e4df080705040653l38daa61aw3883b7c55c8e9de7@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1140 Lines: 31 On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 09:53:34PM +0800, la deng wrote: >On 5/4/07, WANG Cong wrote: >>On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 01:40:04PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> >>>On May 4 2007 19:00, la deng wrote: >>>> >>>> >> >>C gives you the power to control nearly everything. You can, of course, >>control the registers via inserting assembly code. That's not the fault of >>C. >I think you don't understand me correctly > >I know c can inline assmebly to control registers > >but,this control not the globe Analysis of control register like >internal of c++ compiler or lisp 's compiler language,c can't > >sigh You didn't understand me correctly. I mean that C gives you the power to control them, you can do analysis and then do what you like. It's up to you. But I think if you add optimizing options, the compiler won't be so foolish as what you say. So, can we stop now? - 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/