Achim Gratz <strom...@nexgo.de>:
> Just out of curiosity, why have you defined the l_fp access macros in
> such an overly redundant manner? I realize that the compiler will
> optimize most of that away, but it seems odd to do that in the first
> place unless you're expecting to support a platform that has a
> non-conforming compiler that doesn't implement conversions between types
> of different rank correctly.
It was something like that, though not as specific. I have old habits from
pre-ANSI days that might be excessively cautious in a C99-conforming
environment.
Fortunately, we have good regression tests for those macros. So if you want
to submit a simplification MR, feel free. Just be sure you still get this
afterwards.
$ ./waf check
Waf: Entering directory `/home/esr/software/ntp-rescue/ntpsec/build/main'
[190/231] Processing build/main/tests/test_libntp
[198/231] Processing build/main/tests/test_ntpd
Waf: Leaving directory `/home/esr/software/ntp-rescue/ntpsec/build/main'
Wrote test log to: /home/esr/software/ntp-rescue/ntpsec/build/main/test.log
execution summary
tests that pass 2/2
/home/esr/software/ntp-rescue/ntpsec/build/main/tests/test_ntpd
/home/esr/software/ntp-rescue/ntpsec/build/main/tests/test_libntp
tests that fail 0/2
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
Please consider contributing to my Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/esr
so I can keep the invisible wheels of the Internet turning. Give generously -
the civilization you save might be your own.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
