From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 28 12:12:02 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CA011065AA8
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:12:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from luigi@onelab2.iet.unipi.it)
Received: from onelab2.iet.unipi.it (onelab2.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.129])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36D468FC12
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:12:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from luigi@onelab2.iet.unipi.it)
Received: by onelab2.iet.unipi.it (Postfix, from userid 275)
	id C75DE73098; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:17:34 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:17:34 +0100
From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>
To: Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <20090128121734.GA64348@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
References: <20090127132102.GA21574@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
	<497F91C3.7040502@gmx.de>
	<20090127232103.GA40501@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
	<498045E0.3050405@gmx.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <498045E0.3050405@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: duplicate typedefs and system headers ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:12:10 -0000

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:47:44PM +0100, Christoph Mallon wrote:
...
> >Would this be better/more compliant with standards -- i.e.,
> >is the following code correct ? gcc seems to have no objections.
> >
> >	struct foo;
> >	int a(struct foo *);
> >	typedef struct foo bar;
> >	int a(bar *x) { ... }
> 
> What is the problem with just including the correct header? This would 
> be The Right Thing(tm). Everything else is just an ugly hack.

In this context I only need to know that a typedef (or struct)
with that name exists, not its internals.

The "correct header" defines the actual structure and has tons of other
dependencies which make the code harder to read, maintain and compile.

Again, if I had a chance to fix the underlying header(s) I would do,
but at least right now I don't have such a possibility.

	cheers
	luigi