Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 01:50:46 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Mike Heffner <mheffner@vt.edu>, Mike Barcroft <mike@q9media.com> Cc: freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@FreeBSD.ORG, Mike Heffner <mheffner@vt.edu> Subject: Re: whois(1) patch Message-ID: <p05100e0cb73f7fa476a3@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20010531182606.mheffner@novacoxmail.com> References: <XFMail.20010531182606.mheffner@novacoxmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 6:26 PM -0400 5/31/01, Mike Heffner wrote: >On 31-May-2001 Mike Barcroft wrote: >| >| I originally made the ANSI C change to silence a warning, but is >| there any reason not to bring the code up to ANSI C spec? Is it >| likely that anyone will need to compile whois with a K&R compiler? > >It's not likely, but I'm not sure on what the consensus is on >ANSI-fication. Technically, style(9) says it shouldn't be done in >this case, but people (myself included) have been removing K&R >support in small patches like this one. I think there was also talk >of doing a full sweep to remove __P. It is not likely that there will be a specific sweep to get rid of _P() and to ansi-ify routine declarations. However, the consensus is that if you are going to be changing the declarations in some module for OTHER reasons, then you might want to ansi-ify. If you're going to ansi-ify, then you should ansi-ify the whole source file, instead of mixing styles. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu 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?p05100e0cb73f7fa476a3>