Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 08:19:42AM +0900, Neil Booth wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I'm writing an ANSI C compiler front end, and have yet to implement
>> GCC extensions.  It shows exactly the same header trace as
>> above, with __signed.  I believe it is NetBSD's intent to have their
>> headers compilable with compilers other than GCC?
>
> Not really. We used to, but there are too many places in the code that 
> require gcc extensions.

That's certainly true of things like the kernel (where we absolutely
need __asm etc.) but is that true of our headers? (Of course, the
__rename hack is kind of critical...)

Perry