Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:58:01 +0100 From: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Subject: Re: updated Intel C compiler patch-set (kernel code and build infrastructure) Message-ID: <20040301195801.Q38442@newtrinity.zeist.de> In-Reply-To: <20040229182209.7d1cdd12@Magellan.Leidinger.net>; from Alexander@Leidinger.net on Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 06:22:09PM %2B0100 References: <20040229182209.7d1cdd12@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 06:22:09PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Hi, > > I've updated the icc patch-set at > http://www.leidinger.net/FreeBSD/current-patches/ relative to -current > from Feb 26. > Like noted in a private mail to you earlier I wouldn't use both __ICC (which corresponds to "__INTEL_COMPILER && __i386__") and __INTEL_COMPILER in preprocessor directives but stick with __INTEL_COMPILER only. In all the places where the patch uses __ICC it's either implicitly clear that the code is i386-specific (because of the file location etc.) or isn't relevant (because ECC, which AFAIK is the sole other Intel Compiler also defining __INTEL_COMPILER, understands the same code etc.). I think in the long term using both, __ICC and __INTEL_COMPILER, will just cause confusion and the current scheme won't be adhered.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040301195801.Q38442>