Re: [PATCH 0/1] Reduce footprint of xstrtol module

2019-12-07 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Pino, > > It is possible to have several modules share the same .h file. For example, > > is used by many modules. If you leave xstrtol.h as is, users of the > > module don't need to change their source code, they only need to import the > > new module 'xstrtol-error'. > > A separate .h file,

Re: [PATCH 0/1] Reduce footprint of xstrtol module

2019-12-06 Thread Pino Toscano
Hi Bruno, On Thursday, 5 December 2019 22:56:08 CET Bruno Haible wrote: > One suggestion, though: > > > lib/xstrtol-error.h | 45 +++ > > lib/xstrtol.h | 20 --- > > It is possible to have several modules share the same .h file. F

Re: [PATCH 0/1] Reduce footprint of xstrtol module

2019-12-05 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Pino, > I decided to move xstrtol_fatal() to an own xstrtol-error module. > > This has the nice advantage to reduce the footprint a lot That's a good move. Great! > There are only two potential downsides: > 1) users of the xstro* modules may use xstrtol_fatal() right now Your mitigation, to

[PATCH 0/1] Reduce footprint of xstrtol module

2019-12-05 Thread Pino Toscano
Hi, I noticed that using the xstrtol (or any of the other xstrto* modules using it) drags a lot of other gnulib modules, 39 more to be exact including dirname-lgpl, error, errno, getopt-gnu, msvc-*, etc. The reason for this are: - xstrtol.h includes getopt.h, which in turns requires getopt-gnu, et