From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Nov 16 21:04:42 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id VAA19872 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:04:42 -0800 Received: from hub.org (hub.org [199.166.238.138]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA19756 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:04:04 -0800 Received: (from scrappy@localhost) by hub.org (8.7.1/8.7.1) id AAA22348; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:02:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:02:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Have to ask: __dead & __pure? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Hi... I know the question has gone around concerning BIND, so apologies that I didn't follow them, and therefore probably missed the answer, but... Why are there a couple of prototypes in and that are surrounded by __dead ... __dead2 and __pure ... __pure2? What do those mean? And why do they only seem to affect compiling BIND? I've looked at the code, and the include files, and can't figure out where, if anywhere, compiling BIND "tickles" anything different then compiling a simple program, but then again, I can't find anything in the cpp man page that references __dead/__pure *shrug* Thanks... Marc G. Fournier | Knowledge, Information and Communications, Inc (ki.net) scrappy@hub.org | soon to be: | scrappy@ki.net | For more information, send me email.