> 9. The compiler/linker won't let you get it wrong.
> As a C person, I like that[...]
> compile errors (it evalates sizeof(char[1-2*!!(cond)]) which won't
> compile if cond is true).
> I use this in the kernel's module_param(name, type, perm) macro to
> check that the read/write permissions for the module parameter are sane
> (a common mistake was to specify 644 instead of 0644).
> 1. Read the correct mailing list thread and you'll get it right.
> The reason the some strange interface quirk exists might be for
> compatibility with some strange OS or compiler, weird corner case or even
> older versions of this codebase. In other words, historical reasons ("see,
> on the VAX we only had 6 characters for..."). You sometimes only find this
> when you send a patch to fix it and the original author yells at you.
> Sometimes they add it to the FAQ. That does not increase the interface's
> score very much: please try harder.
Q: don't you think streaming editor can handle that?
A: our tools have not such thing
When they will go out of the C box, or just programing language box?
Extending gcc to to waste more time, yes!