Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 21:38:08 -0700
From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>
To: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, audit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: {get,set}progname functions
Message-ID: <20010502043809.3B57D3E28@bazooka.unixfreak.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010501225758.Q5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu>; from will@physics.purdue.edu on "Tue, 1 May 2001 22:57:58 -0500"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> writes: > On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 07:53:21PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > Please review and, if acceptable, commit it. > > style(9) says: > > Only use the __P macro from the include file <sys/cdefs.h> if the source > file in general is (to be) compilable with a K&R Old Testament compiler. > Use of the __P macro in new code is discouraged, although modifications > to existing files should be consistent with that file's conventions. > > Nuke __P() while you're at it. In the header file? Removing __P() in a standalone program is most likely harmless. Removing it from header files is probably a different story. Don't get me wrong; I have no use for __P(). I just think nuking it in header files will be met with more resistance than usual. For one, it makes the entire system (well, anything that uses that header file, which is a large chunck of programs) incompatible with a ``K&R Old Testament'' compiler. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010502043809.3B57D3E28>