Hi,
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > What exactly is the pita here? Al only came up with some rather
> > theoretical problems with no practical relevance.
>
> Lack of type-checking in timers is ugly.
It's a matter of perspective, a bit more type checking would be nice, but
breaking the API just for that is ugly as well. Unless there is a bad need
for it, I don't think it's worth it...
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
[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]