From owner-freebsd-current Sat Dec 20 01:09:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id BAA00812 for current-outgoing; Sat, 20 Dec 1997 01:09:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au (cimlog.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.51.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA00794; Sat, 20 Dec 1997 01:09:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jb@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au) Received: (from jb@localhost) by freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA00292; Sat, 20 Dec 1997 20:12:34 +1100 (EST) From: John Birrell Message-Id: <199712200912.UAA00292@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> Subject: Re: Bruce vandalism again In-Reply-To: <199712200839.TAA23072@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from Bruce Evans at "Dec 20, 97 07:39:50 pm" To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Sat, 20 Dec 1997 20:12:32 +1100 (EST) Cc: grog@lemis.com, julian@whistle.com, bde@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31H (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Bruce Evans wrote: > >I agree. This appears to be a seriously retrograde step. Bruce, why? > > I'm just enforcing this part of style(9): > > Only use the __P macro from the include file if the source > file in general is (to be) compilable with a K&R Old testament compiler. > Use of the __P macro in new code is discouraged, although modifications > to existing files should be consistent with that file's conventions. If the use of the __P macro in new code is discouraged, then FreeBSD is not trying to keep K&R compatibility (like NetBSD insists on). So we are *encouraging* ANSI prototypes. Then (IMO) code that is being edited (for other reasons) should have its function definitions changed to ANSI style at the same time, regardless of how much code is regarded as new according to this silly statement..... > In general code can be considered ``new code'' when it makes up about 50% > or more of the file[s] involved. This is enough to break precedents in > the existing code and use the current style guidelines. Now is that 50% of the code that makes up the function definitions or do we have to count all the other lines of code too?! OK, so it's nearly Christmas (the silly season), and Jordan headed of the last potential flame war about tcl, so I thought I'd light another one. *Chuckle* > > Bruce > Regards, -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@netbsd.org; jb@freebsd.org CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137