From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 1 21:01:52 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACFA5106564A for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 21:01:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644BC8FC1D for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 21:01:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id n41L1oTD015907; Fri, 1 May 2009 17:01:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]); Fri, 01 May 2009 17:01:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 17:01:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: Christoph Mallon In-Reply-To: <49FB61B3.4090604@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <49F4070C.2000108@gmx.de> <20090428114754.GB89235@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20090430.090226.1569754707.imp@bsdimp.com> <49FA8D73.6040207@gmx.de> <49FAB322.9030103@elischer.org> <5f67a8c40905011324s2ad5e02dy47c73ae950845b54@mail.gmail.com> <49FB5C57.6050407@gmx.de> <49FB5DB3.9030200@elischer.org> <49FB61B3.4090604@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Zaphod Beeblebrox , Julian Elischer Subject: Re: C99: Suggestions for style(9) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 21:01:52 -0000 On Fri, 1 May 2009, Christoph Mallon wrote: > Daniel Eischen schrieb: >> +1 for leaving style(9) alone. > > Have you looked at all the proposed changes? I ask to consider them > individually. Point taken, my previous comment will only be for the part about inline declarations. I'll go back and look at the other proposed changes. -- DE