patch to style(9) man page to reflect current practices
cpressey at catseye.mine.nu
Thu Feb 5 12:14:15 PST 2004
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 19:22:50 +0100
Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 10:18:58AM -0800, Chris Pressey wrote:
> > There was one other change I wanted to make, re:
> > "In header files visible to userland applications, prototypes that
> > are visible must use either ``protected'' names (ones beginning with
> > an underscore) or no names with the types. It is preferable to use
> > pro- tected names. E.g., use:
> > void function(int);
> > or:
> > void function(int _fd);"
> Well, I say simple drop the name.
> > I completely fail to see the rationale for that, but I might be
> > missing something. Also, I don't think I've ever seen prototype
> > declarations like that, but I probably just haven't been looking
> > hard enough.
> You might have a #define fd foo somewhere.
Well, I count about 470 occurances of the form #define _foo in the
source tree (more if you count _FOO and __foo and __FOO,) and there's
nothing in style(9) that I can see that forbids definining macros with a
leading underscore. So I'm inclined to agree with you about just
dropping the name.
More information about the Submit