From owner-cvs-all Fri Jan 28 18:38:52 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A479150B6; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:38:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA09871; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:03:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:03:29 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Bruce Evans Cc: Garrett Wollman , Bill Fumerola , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen Makefile.inc Message-ID: <20000128190329.M7157@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <200001282242.RAA26199@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sat, Jan 29, 2000 at 01:31:57PM +1100 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk * Bruce Evans [000128 18:57] wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > > < said: > > > > > I thought I read somewhere that str*() functions were reserved, so wouldn't > > > we be replacing non-standard function names with standard-breaking functions? > > > > No. We would be replacing namespace-polluting names for non-standard > > functions with non-namespace-polluting names for non-standard > > functions. > > > > I agree that `strflags' in an unfortunate choice of name -- > > particularly for a function which is prototyped in a commonly-included > > header file. > > Do you mean the current name, `setflags'? `strflags' isn't too bad except > it misdescribes what the function actually does. > > I now think the changes should be backed out. As well as namespace > pollution, the interfaces are not good enough for a library (there > should be no new interfaces that return results in a static buffer), > they create library versioning problems too close to a release. Although ugly, I'd like to see FreeBSD specific functions prefixed with something to help avoid this, I brought this up about 2 years ago regarding sendfile() and the devstat functions, FreeBSD is known for not polluting our APIs with application specific functions, i don't think a fbsd_ prefix would be too much to ask for. Before anyone tosses a fireball in my direction, please think more on the lines of doing the right thing rather than pretty-ness. Or maybe it's time for a second libutil for these specific functions. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message