Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:13:20 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r204650 - head/share/man/man9
Message-ID:  <201003031413.20685.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100303190551.GJ8200@hoeg.nl>
References:  <201003031849.o23InFJU034484@svn.freebsd.org> <20100303190551.GJ8200@hoeg.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 03 March 2010 2:05:52 pm Ed Schouten wrote:
> * Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > Log:
> >   Remove C99 initializer, since dominant style is to use non-C99 
initializers.
> >   
> >   Requested by:	jhb
> 
> Maybe I'm flogging a dead horse, but this is 2010. Whether or not a
> compiler supports C99 is no longer an issue. We're already far beyond
> the point of going back to C89.

The point is that if you look at almost all of the new-bus drivers in the 
tree, they do not use C99 initializers to initialize their KOBJ class.
Given that, I do not see a reason to make driver(9) document a style that
almost no drivers use.  If we did want to do something different, we
should use the DEFINE_CLASS_0() macro that can be used to declare a KOBJ
class.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201003031413.20685.jhb>