Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Jan 2002 23:51:42 -0800
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>
Cc:        Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Dallas De Atley <deatley@apple.com>, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.freebsd.org>, "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@wasabisystems.com>, "Todd C. Miller" <Todd.Miller@courtesan.com>, Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org>
Subject:   Re: __P macro question
Message-ID:  <3C58F78E.3F66EA8E@mindspring.com>
References:  <68578.1012450924@winston.freebsd.org> <200201310701.g0V71Ci75803@beastie.mckusick.com> <20020131072933.GQ22384@daemon.ninth-circle.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> Which items can we identify to tackle in this effort?
> 
> - Get rid of __P() macros in source files
> - Use proper ANSI prototypes, this flows from the point above
> 
> what else?

Other candidates are other macros in cdefs.h; because of the
__attribute stuff, I would be loathe to get rid of it entirely,
since it encapsulates some GCC dependence/independence, but the
const/void/volatile definitions are a possibility.

There are also the varradic function declarations, which are
not all ANSI-C style, yet, use of __STRING and __CONCAT, etc..

My recommendation would be to do __P() first, now that there
is a cross-BSD consensus, and leave other changes for other
discussions.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C58F78E.3F66EA8E>