Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 16:14:47 -0600 From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett A. Wollman), hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hmmmm! `resvport' keyword not documented *anywhere*? Message-ID: <v0213050eacc1949ec164@[199.183.109.242]>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: >> This begs the question of "why have undocumented word options at all?". Garrett A. Wollman responded: > For backward compatibility. Compatibility is a noble reason to have word options. However, IMHO, it does not justify undocumented options. On this subject, I adopt the government policy. "If it's in there, it has to be listed on the label" An undocumented "feature" is a coding error. ---- Richard Wackerbarth rkw@dataplex.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v0213050eacc1949ec164>