From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:30:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:30:16 -0400 Received: from nbd.it.uc3m.es ([163.117.139.192]:55824 "EHLO nbd.it.uc3m.es") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:30:05 -0400 From: "Peter T. Breuer" Message-Id: <200108311329.PAA12559@nbd.it.uc3m.es> Subject: Re: [IDEA+RFC] Possible solution for min()/max() war X-ELM-OSV: (Our standard violations) hdr-charset=US-ASCII In-Reply-To: "from Roman Zippel at Aug 31, 2001 02:58:21 pm" To: Roman Zippel Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:29:41 +0200 (CEST) CC: "Peter T. Breuer" , "Patrick J. LoPresti" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Anonymously-To: Reply-To: ptb@it.uc3m.es X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL89 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Roman Zippel wrote:" > On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Peter T. Breuer wrote: > > Try reading the last 10 days kernel messages. The last 48 hours are > > particularly rewarding. > > I have, but I only get the feeling, we're hunting here for imaginary bugs. As I said, nobody has been too precise about the bugs to me either! I just want to provide an alternative to the 3arg min/max that would otherwise have been imposed. Whether we really need either of these alternatives is another argument. > Real bugs could be found with -Wsign-compare, but nobody wants to use it > because our master doesn't want it... > Please define the bugs first, you're trying to fix! If you don't like > -Wsign-compare, consider defining rules for the Stanford checker. This way Stanford checker? Is that a programmable C type checker? If so, lemmee at it. Have you a URL, btw? Peter