Re: [9fans] 8c question

[Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 114 bytes --]

talk about making something simple as bizarre as possible.
that include file is just amazing, quite remarkable.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3013 bytes --]

From: jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] 8c question
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 15:03:12 -0400
Message-ID: <f4e875772b165f384f8dd867dc1819b0@plan9.bell-labs.com>

On Fri Jul  8 10:37:10 EDT 2005, rminnich@lanl.gov wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Russ Cox wrote:
> 
> > Nonsense.  There are plenty of typedefs in Linux.
> 
> for scalar types, sure. They're all over the place. Did you look any 
> deeper than the grep | wc?
> 
> What is being proposed is a typedef for something that might or might not 
> be a struct, depending on architecture. I'll be interested to see if that 
> flies. Go for it.
> 
> ron

There are actually more 'struct' typedefs in the linux header files
than Russ found in the .c files:

ethel% pwd
/n/other/jmk/linux-2.6.9/include
ethel% grep 'typedef.*{' */*.h|wc 
   1351    5593   62194
ethel% 

e.g. linux/spinlock.h:

#if (__GNUC__ > 2)
  typedef struct { } spinlock_t;
  #define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED (spinlock_t) { }
#else
  typedef struct { int gcc_is_buggy; } spinlock_t;
  #define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED (spinlock_t) { 0 }
#endif