On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 06:21:20PM +0000, rubisher wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 01:10:11PM +0000, rubisher wrote:
>>> But as far as the 1st parameter of grub_vsprintf is a pointer,
>>> wouldn't it be better to write:
>>> --- kern/misc.c.orig 2009-11-22 13:07:22.000000000 +0000
>>> +++ kern/misc.c 2009-11-22 13:07:51.000000000 +0000
>>> @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@
>>> {
>>> int ret;
>>>
>>> - ret = grub_vsprintf (0, fmt, args);
>>> + ret = grub_vsprintf (NULL, fmt, args);
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>
>> Yes. But we have many of those, so we don't go huntin' them. If you'd
>> like to help us, a patch that does this change in bulk would be welcome.
>
> It will be of great pleasure for me, but I didn't foreseen so much (the
> most difficult to me are 'opaque pointer') but I hoppe that such 'sparse'
> would help me for the most ;<)
If you do this, make sure you understand why it makes no difference in
standards-compliant C. In particular, this understanding matters when
functions with variable-length argument lists are concerned.
(See the C FAQ for more details.)
--
Colin Watson [[email protected]]
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
