Re: [PATCH 02/13] hrtimer: remove useless const

[Andrew Morton]

Roman Zippel <zippel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > your patch makes code larger on gcc3.
> > 
> > By 120 bytes here.  I dropped the patch.
> 
> Is this really worth it? This _is_ a compiler problem, are we going to add 
> now const everywhere to work around a (small) compiler problem, which is 
> already fixed in newer versions?
> 

Can't say I care a lot, but there doesn't seem much point in giving away
the consts now we have them, if it just produces worse code.

const arguments to functions are pretty useful for code readability and
maintainability too, if you use them consistently.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/