From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 10 15:49:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786FE1065680; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:49:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B05D8FC13; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:49:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m6AFjrbo099113; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:45:53 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:45:56 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20080710.094556.-262765509.imp@bsdimp.com> To: das@freebsd.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20080709154945.GA47824@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <200807091404.m69E4jiC075715@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080709154945.GA47824@zim.MIT.EDU> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, danger@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man9 style.9 X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:49:02 -0000 In message: <20080709154945.GA47824@zim.MIT.EDU> David Schultz writes: : On Wed, Jul 09, 2008, Daniel Gerzo wrote: : > -Do not declare functions inside other functions; ANSI C says that : > -such declarations have file scope regardless of the nesting of the : > -declaration. : > -Hiding file declarations in what appears to be a local : > -scope is undesirable and will elicit complaints from a good compiler. : > +Do not declare functions inside other functions; nested functions are : > +a GCC extension and are not permitted by ANSI C. : : We use lots of extensions that aren't strict ANSI C. I think the : real reason not to use them is that gcc's nested functions are : particularly unwieldily. First, they're not true lexical closures : (and can't be), which makes them much less useful. Second, they : are unsupported unless a number of assumptions are met, e.g., must : have an executable stack, must be able to invalidate the I cache : from userland, and must not have separate I and D address spaces. : Nested functions abominable enough that Apple disabled the feature : in OS X's build of gcc --- and the Sun and Intel compilers don't : support them, even though Intel claims nearly complete gcc : compatibility. I think the bug in the commit was the '-' lines. The '+' lines were good. Maybe a .Pp line would then be needed. Warner