From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Dec 20 19:18:25 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA03471
          for current-outgoing; Sat, 20 Dec 1997 19:18:25 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03465;
          Sat, 20 Dec 1997 19:18:06 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from brian@awfulhak.org)
Received: from gate.lan.awfulhak.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17155;
	Sun, 21 Dec 1997 02:56:17 GMT
	(envelope-from brian@gate.lan.awfulhak.org)
Message-Id: <199712210256.CAA17155@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>
cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), dyson@freebsd.org,
        gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, julian@whistle.com, bde@freebsd.org,
        current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Bruce vandalism again 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 20 Dec 1997 10:26:30 PST."
             <199712201826.KAA19822@bubba.whistle.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 1997 02:56:17 +0000
From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 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?

I'd vote yes - definitely.  However, I'm not in the middle of 
changing large chunks of code that I'll have to patch by hand because 
of a change like this :-I

> -Archie
> 
> PS. Be careful how you answer... :-)
> 
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Archie Cobbs   *   Whistle Communications, Inc.  *   http://www.whistle.com

-- 
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org>, <brian@FreeBSD.org>, <brian@OpenBSD.org>
      <http://www.Awfulhak.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....