On Wed, 19 Aug 1998, Richard Earnshaw wrote:

: > Actually, I have one better - we assert the presence of format(__kprintf__),
: > a native-gcc hack, by defining __KPRINTF_ATTRIBUTE__ in the cpp spec.  
: > Something like that would be useful here.

: I'm not convinced this is the correct approach.  It is not so bad for 
: kprintf, because if the attribute is not available, all that happens is 
: that you loose potential warnings.  But for return_in_regs, the way your 
: code gets compiled will change.

Well, if you assume GCC 2.8 has it, that's not quite right either, but I
suppose the best behavior there is to bomb out if the attribute is
unrecognized.  (Don't want to bomb on 2.7, of course.)

-- 
-- Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Bus. todd_vierling@xn.xerox.com)