On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Bruce Evans wrote:
>
> > > I will not be doing any changes that affect them, Though I may still add
> > > the prototype definitions in protsw.h as that's a generally useful thing
> > > to do.
> >
> > I think those are the least useful of your changes. They are certainly
> > the most intrusive if the function typedefs are actually used.
>
> yes but the rest of them have been argued against by the KAME folk
> and I have agreed to let them do it..
> (which changes in specific terms, are you refering to?)
Function typedefs.
> The good thing about the typedefs is that
> if you change them, then you automatically change all teh prototypes that
> use them,
So there is no benefit if no prototypes use them.
> which means that when you compile, you get failures on all teh
> functions that mismatch their prototypes which means that you HAVE to fix
> all the mismatching functions. Without them you just get warning messages
> on the structure initialisations, which you can easily miss, or ignore..
They aren't easy to miss :-). You see them once every time you build a
kernel with them configured. I think it's just a gcc "feature" that
mismatches in initializers are only warnings.
Warnings for initializers can be suppressed using casts. That is
really evil (worse than varargs :-) but we do it for syscalls and vops.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
