why test for "__GNUC__"?

  since (as i understand it) the linux kernel *requires* gcc these
days, what is the point of the numerous preprocessor tests of the
form:

  #ifdef __GNUC__

and its variations?

  under the circumstances, aren't all those tests redundant?

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: why test for "__GNUC__"?
  - From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: "signed" versus "__signed__" versus "__signed" in arch-specific "types.h" files
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH ??] Re: incorrect taint of ndiswrapper
Previous by thread: "signed" versus "__signed__" versus "__signed" in arch-specific "types.h" files
Next by thread: Re: why test for "__GNUC__"?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]