Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 21:09:55 +0200 From: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@gmx.de> To: Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Stlye(9) strengthen statements on not using K&R function definitions Message-ID: <20220920210955.7ee9fd9f@ernst.home> In-Reply-To: <20220920153801.wzsrphd2ychvfbgm@mutt-hbsd> References: <CANCZdfqgjM52fVoCbEo0PteW7%2BGz5L0CJ=yBZ%2BKshVUY7Utx1A@mail.gmail.com> <20220920153801.wzsrphd2ychvfbgm@mutt-hbsd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 11:38:01 -0400 Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 10:31:17AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > Greetings > > > > I've posted a review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D35945 which strength= s > > statements about K&R definitions and declarations: don't use them. Mos= t of > > the K&R code has been removed from the tree (ufs being the last stragg= ler). > > Future versions of the C standard will remove the K&R definitions and > > declaration syntax. clang 15 will whine about this construct. > > > > The time is ripe to move to language that suggests an outright prohibi= tion. > > > > Comments about language? Make them in phabricator. > > Comments about the idea? Reply here > > FYI: I did notice the other day that less(1) strictly uses K&R. > Yes, but less is under contrib. The K&R purge should be limited to pure FreeBSD code IMHO. =2D- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20220920210955.7ee9fd9f>