Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:06:26 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/rm rm.c src/usr.sbin/chown chown.c src/usr.sbin/dev_mkdb dev_mkdb.c Message-ID: <200112152006.fBFK6Qs17643@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200112141622.fBEGMg705939@freefall.freebsd.org> <20011215090750.A91194@citusc17.usc.edu> <20011215095930.A62613@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:There is something I do not follow.
:
:Over time we have gone through great pains to keep the code compatible
:with a wide range of compilers (including K&R when possible, by
:using __P() macros), and now people complain suggesting that instead
:of supplying perfectly legal (K&R and ANSI) C prototypes to 3
:functions, which do not break anything and only increase code
:portability towards possibly broken compilers, I should instead
:compile the source tree with a version-specific compiler.
:
:Am i the only one who sees a contraddiction here ?
:
: cheers
: luigi
I wouldn't call it 'great pains'. I only use __P when
I notice that all the other nearby prototypes are using
__P, just so it looks consistent. Otherwise I don't bother.
I would prefer not to use __P. Considering our massive use of
64 bit integer arguments in the codebase, there isn't a chance
in hell that it would run without proper prototypes.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200112152006.fBFK6Qs17643>