> And for the libbio changes, I’m more opposed to the four functions > Bgetle2, Bgetle4, Bputle2, and Bputle4 and the odd use of the > BPUTC && BPUTLE4 macros. Those implementations are found in other > portions of the code, not specific to libbio, and seem to be > grafted on in a slightly off manner. That said, I’ll gladly > change my mind if the p9p, Inferno, and a few other forks of the > libbio source give it their blessing. To date, none have chimed > in to contribute to the conversation in any way so I’m more than > happy to use a patch in Go to still use Plan 9’s libbio but pull > in the four new functions and the macros and go from there.
I'd like to hear more from you about the (mis)use of Bgetle* and friends (not the macros, we all agree on these). I think we ought to prepare a submission to Bell Labs for a reasoned inclusion of these functions in the library (and the corresponding B*be ones, which for some reason Go does not need (?!)). As for the macros, I know Russ was never in favour of using them, we may have a case to have them rescinded :-) I suspect that they would all have been dropped, if Russ had known where to look for them. If memory serves, he reverted a CL, but not all pertinent CLs, possibly on request from (members of) the Plan 9 faction. ++L
