From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:51:57 -0400
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:45:36PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Please reject this patch. The gcc folks are wrong in this case.
>
> Im curious - why do you make that specific claim. The multiline literals are
> rather ugly.
Which of the following is more readable:
/* try atomic lock inline, if that fails, spin out of line */
"\tbtsl $1,%0\n"
It's only gross because you decided to make it so, try:
"btsl $1,%0\n\t"
Which is what I use just about everywhere now and I'm prefectly
fine with it.
Franks a lot,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 23 2001 - 21:00:33 EST