On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 17:50:47 -0700, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
> I'm one of the people who's been helping port netsurf to
> plan9, and I've started rebasing changes that we did against
> 3.9 to master, so that we can start submitting what makes sense.
Great.
> First off, thanks for a wonderfully portable codebase -- it's
> great how small the patches are to get most of the libraries
> working.
I'm very pleased that it's proving possible (and even easy) for you.
> I'm hoping that we can get things to the point where we need to
> carry very few patches forward, though I don't expect you'll want
> to maintain our build system (ie, the mkfiles), so I'm going to
> leave them out of patches.
True, at least for now we won't want a secondary build system. We're
resisting CMake for similar reasons.
> The plan 9 compilers are not gcc, and do not handle many
> gcc extensions like expression templates. this change
> replaces them with either plain macros, or with static
> inline functions, which are already in use elsewhere in
> the project.
I've reviewed the patch and it's not fundamentally bad, though
the inline function for lwc_string_ref() will end up exploding the
size of code a lot on many of our platforms.
Instead I'd prefer to rework this to have the same effect for
you, but to remain slightly less impactful on our other platforms.
Could you let me know of a preprocessor macro I can rely on for plan9?
With that, I can then rework this into something I hope will work
for you, but also be nicer for the rest of our targets.
D.
--
Daniel Silverstone http://www.netsurf-browser.org/
PGP mail accepted and encouraged. Key Id: 3CCE BABE 206C 3B69
No comments:
Post a Comment