From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jun 7 22:14:29 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1BF37B407 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 22:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA00153; Sat, 8 Jun 2002 15:14:15 +1000 Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 15:14:57 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org To: Giorgos Keramidas Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is it bad to use index() internally in libc? In-Reply-To: <20020608030034.GA21440@hades.hell.gr> Message-ID: <20020608151212.W18399-100000@gamplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > WARNS=5 is rather picky about our libc in CURRENT. One of the > warnings I can see is: > > /home/charon/a/freebsd/src/lib/libc/db/btree/bt_delete.c: > In function `__bt_stkacq': > /home/charon/a/freebsd/src/lib/libc/db/btree/bt_delete.c:155: > warning: declaration of `index' shadows a global declaration > > Is it worth going through the file and changing `index' with something > that does not conflict with index(3)? `index' is a fine variable name. This warning is really about traditional namespace pollution in stealing a fine variable name. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message