[PATCH] diff portability fixes

[Denys Vlasenko]

On Monday 08 February 2010 21:05, Rob Landley wrote:
> So basically, you're only removing the bits of C99 that your particular broken 
> compiler doesn't support, and leaving large swaths of C99 lying around that 
> Turbo C and friends wouldn't have supported back when C89 was still relevant, 
> with no actual rhyme or reason behind it other than it works for you.

Yes, that's what he does. That's what all of use do -
we fix (or tweak, if they are not technically "broken")
things which do not work for us.

If these fixes/tweaks make busybox usable in more cases,
it's good.

I would not accept patches which make busybox bigger
(modulo gcc random jitter) or which make code noticeably uglier.

However, if patches do not do either of the above, why not?

For example, we still don't allow "mixed declarations and code",
which is valid and useful C99 construct,
neither does Linux kernel - is it also stupid?
-- 
vda