On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 03:45:46PM -0700, Steve Beattie wrote: > Not at all. Honestly, my preferences are: > > 1) __unused — simple, clear, straightforward annotation. Alas, > conflicts with a symbol in older glibcs and with convention of __ > prefixed symbols being system synbols. I wish gcc just went ahead > and defined this. > > 2) __aa_unused — nearly as simple as __unused; the underscores > indicate specialness, the __aa_ prefix makes it less likely to > conflict with any actual system symbol name, despite intruding on > the system symbol convention. NACK'ed by Christian, so would need > at least one more ACK to be acceptable. (_aa_unused has the same > problem, standards-wise,)
Sorry Christian. :) __aa_unused please. Acked-by: Seth Arnold <[email protected]> > 3) aa_unused — easy to confuse with the rest of an argument declaration. > > 4) aa_unused_arg() — mildly confusing in argument lists, but makes it > more explicit that it's not to be confused with the type or name > declaration. > > 5) AA_UNUSED — so shouty, hurts my ears and eyes. But follows the > all-caps convention for macros, so is explicit about what it is. > > Sooo, a great big shrug from me. But I'm getting tired of jenkins > nagging me that the parser fails to build on Ubuntu 12.04. Thanks
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
