Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:34:21 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r206687 - head/usr.bin/indent Message-ID: <4BC84B3D.90302@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100416210721.W1238@delplex.bde.org> References: <201004152141.o3FLf7WX025585@svn.freebsd.org> <20100416210721.W1238@delplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> It seems that identifier "_t" is sometimes used as a variable name, >> even in our tree. [...] > > Funny. POSIX reserves "_t" as a suffix in header files, so unless it > also requires a non-null prefix, "_t" is reserved in POSIX. I think you must be reading a different version of POSIX to me. My version says that symbols ending with "_t" may be defined in any header; but not that they cannot be used in non-headers. If one wished to write code which was guaranteed to work on any conforming POSIX system, one would naturally wish to avoid symbols which might legitimately be defined in headers; but as long as we're concerned with one specific system which happens to not define the symbol "_t" in any header, this is a non-issue. -- Colin Percival Security Officer, FreeBSD | freebsd.org | The power to serve Founder / author, Tarsnap | tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BC84B3D.90302>