From owner-cvs-all Tue Sep 28 10: 6:24 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B7A1543B; Tue, 28 Sep 1999 10:06:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@scc.nl) Received: from [212.238.132.94] (helo=scones.sup.scc.nl) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 11W0hl-0004p7-00; Tue, 28 Sep 1999 17:06:17 +0000 Received: from scc.nl (scones.sup.scc.nl [192.168.2.4]) by scones.sup.scc.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA64797; Tue, 28 Sep 1999 19:06:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from marcel@scc.nl) Message-ID: <37F0F581.C8CB9CE2@scc.nl> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 19:06:10 +0200 From: Marcel Moolenaar Organization: SCC vof X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Peter Wemm , Marcel Moolenaar , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libtermcap termcap.c References: <19990928145514.05BF31CBF@overcee.netplex.com.au> <199909281624.JAA90525@apollo.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Matthew Dillon wrote: > > :Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > :> Modified files: > :> lib/libtermcap termcap.c > :> Log: > :> Explicitly use sigemptyset to clear a sigset_t. Explicit > :> initialization of sa_flags added so that we can lose the bzero. > : > :Do NOT "loose" the bzero! > : > :Cheers, > :-Peter > > What peter is saying is that the bzero is necessary because the structure > may change in the future, perhaps adding a new field that termcap does > not know about. I don't think that's a particular good argument. You don't simply add a field to sigaction. You create a complete new interface to handle all the compatibility issues. To put it differently; the argument holds if it is done for every structure there is, not just for sigaction alone. > Also, other operating systems may implement additional > fields that termcap doesn't know about. Yes, but is this termcap not specific to this OS? Isn't it our goal to provide an efficient and compatible libc? Efficiency is improved. Compatibility isn't broken... > This is why you generally bzero a structure before initializing it, even > if you 'know' you are initializing all the fields. It makes for better > portability and compatibility. I understand that, but portability isn't an issue in this case, is it? And as for compatibility; it now uses sigemptyset, and thus is finally compatible. -- Marcel Moolenaar mailto:marcel@scc.nl SCC Internetworking & Databases http://www.scc.nl/ The FreeBSD project mailto:marcel@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message