Date: Sat, 20 Dec 1997 10:26:30 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, julian@whistle.com, bde@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bruce vandalism again Message-ID: <199712201826.KAA19822@bubba.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199712201419.HAA24217@mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Dec 20, 97 07:19:07 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams writes:
> > John-Mark Gurney said:
> > If style(9) is broken, which apparently it is, then it should be fixed.
> > It isn't a religious document, but one that should change with the times.
>
> I disagree. I'm with Bruce here in that you shouldn't 'bit by bit'
> change code to use new ANSI prototypes *UNLESS* you change all of the
> code to use ANSI prototypes. So, either convert them all to the new
> style (my preference), or leave them all the old style, but having a
> mix/match of both is silly.
>
> And, if you want to change it all to the new style, make the 'style'
> changes commits separate from the functional changes commits so one can
> see the functionality changes easy w/out having to dig through the style
> changes.
OK, so here's a thought experiment:
Suppose somebody suddenly showed up with a giant patch file that:
(a) Got rid of all uses of __P() in the kernel (ie, unwrapped them
so that all function declarations used ANSI protptypes)
(b) Changed every function definition to use ANSI prototypes as well
Would it get committed?
-Archie
PS. Be careful how you answer... :-)
___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712201826.KAA19822>