On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Garrett D'Amore
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cyril Plisko wrote:
>>
>> Hi !
>>
>> What is the policy (if any) on using C++ reserved words (keywords) in
>> header files, that shipped in /usr/include ?
>>
>>
>
> I don't know if there is any official policy, but IMO:
>
> 1) Use of C++ reserved words in *public* headers that are to be consumed by
> userland applications should be verboten


Agree 100%. And by *public* I understand all those shipped in /usr/include.


> 2) Correct use of C++ reserved words (in code intended to be compiled as
> C++) protected by #ifdef __cplusplus seems OK to me.
>
>
> 3) Incorrect use of C++ reserved words in kernel-private headers (e.g.
> #ifdef __KERNEL protected) seems like a bad idea, but possibly acceptable.
>  (Note however that sometimes C++ code might be compiled into objects which
> get included in device drivers, and so even this case might not be a wise
> idea.)

Right.

So, should I file a bug if I find a case of "unprotected" C++ keyword
in system headers ?

I have a real case here with customer' C++ application that happens to
be related to SCSI. They are evaluating support for Solaris
Express/OpenSolaris. The offending header file is
/usr/include/sys/scsi/targets/stdef.h [1]. The structure member
"explicit" breaks compilation with C++. Apparently this is newish
code, that was added in rev 5628 [2], so they never saw this with
Solaris 10.
So does this warrants filing a bug against stdef.h ?


[1] 
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/sys/scsi/targets/stdef.h#845
[2] 
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/diff/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/sys/scsi/targets/stdef.h?r2=%2Fonnv%2Fonnv-gate%2Fusr%2Fsrc%2Futs%2Fcommon%2Fsys%2Fscsi%2Ftargets%2Fstdef.h%405628&r1=%2Fonnv%2Fonnv-gate%2Fusr%2Fsrc%2Futs%2Fcommon%2Fsys%2Fscsi%2Ftargets%2Fstdef.h%405425

-- 
Regards,
 Cyril
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code

Reply via email to