From: Ronald G. M. <rmi...@la...> - 2005-03-27 03:34:36
|
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Keir Fraser wrote: > Actually, one of the more interesting thing to discuss imo is how to structure > the public interface headers to support multiple architectures. As the headers are written now, they are not portable across different C compilers, which is a concern to me. If your C compiler doesn't act just like gcc, you're going to have to translate the headers. > Is it feasible to strive for much commonality, or should each arch have > its own public headers, or what? I don't have a good feel for what the > best solution is going to be... It is feasible to strive for commonality, I think. I would prefer headers that make no use of any gcc magic. It is a bit of a problem for me each time xen rotates headers as I have to translate them all over again. My issues with the Plan 9 port have all revolved around portability from x86 to x86, due to the gcc-isms in the headers. ron |