Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:09:40 +0300
From:      Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@linux.gr>
To:        Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Include files that depend on include files
Message-ID:  <20050809230940.GC618@gothmog.gr>
In-Reply-To: <200508092222.j79MM1DR013799@sora.hank.home>
References:  <20050809220121.GB15004@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <200508092222.j79MM1DR013799@sora.hank.home>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2005-08-10 00:22, Dirk GOUDERS <gouders@et.bocholt.fh-ge.de> wrote:
>> This is intentational.  We try to avoid having headers bring in more
>> then absolutly required when included.  I'm not sure what your second
>> question means.
>
> With my second question I wanted to ask if this intention is only for
> kernel level code or a general one.  I am asking this, because
> somewhen in a project that I was not actually participating in I heard
> or read a rule that roughly said: "all include files have to include
> all files they depend on and compile cleanly", but that project was on
> a user space program.

Well, first of all "include files" do not "compile".  Then, there are
two different schools of thought on this matter:

    a) the "purity and clean state of the namespace" school, and
    b) the "keep the header files a userlevel program has to include as
       few as possible" school

Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks.  AFAIK, in FreeBSD
the first is preferred.

- Giorgos




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050809230940.GC618>