From owner-freebsd-arch  Thu Aug 16  3:35: 5 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from arb.arb.za.net (arb.arb.za.net [196.7.148.4])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D031E37B40D
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.za)
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
	by arb.arb.za.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with UUCP id f7GAYvu01926
	for arch@freebsd.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:34:57 +0200 (SAST)
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.za)
Received: from grondar.za (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by grimreaper.grondar.za (8.11.5/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7GAAsK68419
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:10:54 +0100 (BST)
	(envelope-from mark@grondar.za)
Message-Id: <200108161010.f7GAAsK68419@grimreaper.grondar.za>
To: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Style 9 nitpicking question
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:10:53 +0100
From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-arch.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-arch>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-arch>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Hi

A piece of style(9) says:

<manpage_extract name=style sect=9>

     static void
     usage()
     {
	     /* Insert an empty line if the function has no local variables. */

     Use printf(3), not fputs/puts/putchar/whatever; it's faster and usually
     cleaner, not to mention avoiding stupid bugs.

[ snip ]

	 "usage: f [-aDde] [-b b_arg] [-m m_arg] req1 req2 [opt1 [opt2]]\n"
	 "usage: f [-a | -b] [-c [-dEe] [-n number]]\n"

	     (void)fprintf(stderr, "usage: f [-ab]\n");
	     exit(EX_USAGE);
     }

</manpage_extract>

Questions:

1) That "(void)" is useless by any metric that I am able to determine
   (WARNS=2, BDECFLAGS etc), and gets in the way of linting. Is there
   any reason to continue to advocate its use by this example? There
   is no other reference to "voiding-out" of return values.

2) Is this (fprintf(stderr, "...", ...); exit(n);) really better than
   errx(1, "...", ...); ?

Any objections to changing the 

	(void)fprintf(stderr, "usage: f [-ab]\n");
	exit(EX_USAGE);

to

	errx(EX_USAGE, "usage: f [-ab]\n");

??

M
-- 
Mark Murray
Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message