Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Nikita Danilov <> | | Date | Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:30:46 +0400 | | Subject | Re: I request inclusion of reiser4 in the mainline kernel |
| |
Stephen Pollei writes: > On 9/19/05, Horst von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> wrote: > > Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com> wrote: > > > It's other way around: declaration is guarded by the preprocessor > > > conditional so that nobody accidentally use znode_is_loaded() outside of > > > the debugging mode. > > > > Since when has a missing declaration prevented anyone calling a function in > > C?!
It issues a warning, which is enough, given that reiser4 code was warning-free most of the time.
> Never AFAIK... K&R, ANSI,ISO C89, c99, whatever version that I know of... > You'd need -Werror and -Wmissing-prototype to make that worth it. > Otherwise the standard says they namesys requested "please make a good
No, evil namesys is not responsible for this, Sir. :-)
> quess as to what the args are...". > K&R didn't even have the kind of prototypes we know and love today... > So they shouldn't do this half-ass #if/#endif stuff.. either rip it > out, or be a man and make the compile fail when someone calls > znode_is_loaded , if thats what you really want. It's really over > silly anyway, as it will fail at link time if they had matching > preprocessor stuff around the function definition.
Failing (with a warning) at compilation is faster. And people are known to went as far as to select major compiler version based on the compilation speed.
Nikita. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |