|
From: Anton A. <ai...@ca...> - 2003-03-28 11:38:36
|
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Philipp Thomas wrote: > Yes, and rightly so. Both 'struct foo;' and 'foo;' as unnamed members are > rejected without -fms-extensions and indeed to me they smell too much of MS > kludging around bugs they themselves introduced. So I would *really* like to > change the code such that it doesn't need the -fms-extensions by using named > structs where necessary, thus only making use of *documented* gcc > extensions. > > > > 2003-27.03.2003 Philipp Thomas <pt...@su...> > > > * Makefile: Use -fms-extensions if gcc groks it. > > > > I will hold on for your reply to above question and apply if still > > necessary. > > I'd rather see you agreeing on the above. How about you show me a snippet of what you propose it to look like, i.e. send me a patch that changes layout.h to your proposal (no need to change the rest of the driver yet). I am willing to have a look but I am not promising to like or accept it. If I find it sufficiently non-revolting I will let you know and I would then accept a patch that switches the whole driver but no promises! Best regards, Anton -- Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @) Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/ |
