On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, [iso-8859-1] Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > > They're defined later on in the same file with bodies and > > nothingin between needs them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > include/linux/coda_linux.h | 3 --- > > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/coda_linux.h b/include/linux/coda_linux.h > > index 1c47a34..31b7531 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/coda_linux.h > > +++ b/include/linux/coda_linux.h > > @@ -43,9 +43,6 @@ int coda_getattr(struct vfsmount *, struct dentry *, > > struct kstat *); > > int coda_setattr(struct dentry *, struct iattr *); > > > > /* this file: heloers */ > > -static __inline__ struct CodaFid *coda_i2f(struct inode *); > > -static __inline__ char *coda_i2s(struct inode *); > > -static __inline__ void coda_flag_inode(struct inode *, int flag); > > char *coda_f2s(struct CodaFid *f); > > int coda_isroot(struct inode *i); > > int coda_iscontrol(const char *name, size_t length); > > -- > > 1.5.2.2 > > > > I was taught formally that all procedures must be declared > before they are encountered in a file. This constitutes what > is generally known as "good standards of engineering practice." > It also guarantees a compiler diagnostic if the declaration and > the function doesn't match.
They still are declared before they are used (the other two functions are similar to this randomly picked example): $ grep "coda_i2f" include/linux/coda_linux.h static __inline__ struct CodaFid *coda_i2f(struct inode *); static __inline__ struct CodaFid *coda_i2f(struct inode *inode) I removed the first one of these. The latter is followed by the body of the function. By using some fuzzy word like "encountered" you just make your point obscure enough so that I cannot follow what you're trying to say. If you refer to use of the function by "encountering", then that property is still maintained and we still get all the type-checking and so on (even after this removal). > You should not remove things just because you don't think they > are necessary. They do no harm and removing them can cause > code checking tools to issue diagnostic messages. Do you really think so? I mean in this specific case, did you even bothered to check the file before hitting the send button? ...I just fail to see what is your point in keeping these three because they're declared later on in the same file, though with the body at that time. Do you also claim that all the other ~5000+ static inlines with body in kernel headers (but not forward declared) are not following those "good standards" you're asking for (they certainly won't issue extra diagnostic messages)? -- i.
