Re: [PATCH 12/13] "const static" vs "static const" in nfs4

[Ben Pfaff]

Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 12:01:32AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>> No need for that. It's just something that ICC complains about
>> "storage class not being first" - gcc doesn't care.
>
> Neither does C99, so ICC really should either STFU or make that warning
> independent from the rest and possible to turn off...

C99 does deprecate "const static":

     6.11.5 Storage-class specifiers
1    The placement of a storage-class specifier other than at the
     beginning of the declaration specifiers in a declaration is
     an obsolescent feature.

-- 
Ben Pfaff 
email: blp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web: http://benpfaff.org

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/