Re: PROPOSAL: dot-proc interface [was: /proc stuff]
Kai Henningsen (kaih@khms.westfalen.de)
11 Nov 2001 12:06:00 +0200
jakob@unthought.net (Jakob „stergaard) wrote on 04.11.01 in <20011104211118.U14001@unthought.net>:
[quoteto.xps]
> On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 03:06:27PM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, [iso-8859-1] Jakob %stergaard wrote:
> >
> > > So just ignore square brackets that have "=" " " and ">" between them ?
> > >
> > > What happens when someone decides "[----> ]" looks cooler ?
> >
> > First of all, whoever had chosen that output did a fairly idiotic thing.
> > But as for your question - you _do_ know what regular expressions are,
> > don't you? And you do know how to do this particular regex without
> > any use of library functions, right?
>
> A regex won't tell me if 345987 is a signed or unsigned 32-bit or 64-bit
> integer, or if it's a double.
You do not *need* that information at runtime. If you think you do, you're
doing something badly wrong.
I cannot even imagine what program would want that information.
> Sure, implement arbitrary precision arithmetic in every single app out there
> using /proc....
Bullshit. Implement whatever arithmetic is right *for your problem*. And
notice when the value you get doesn't fit so you can tell the user he
needs a newer version. That's all.
There's no reason whatsoever to care what data type the kernel used.
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/