Milan Jurik <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > Joerg Schilling pí??e v so 01. 05. 2010 v 19:17 +0200: > > James Carlson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > You Most of the code I see from Sun does not follow > > > > these rules and the variable names are of course OK in a piece of code > > > > that > > > > is easy to read (all string sources in ON use tose 's' variables..... > > > > Note that K&K function _implemetations_ are needed for portability and > > > > that > > > > there is no benefit from using ANSI C here as there are ANCI C function > > > > _declarations_. > > > > > > > > I hope you know the difference between a function "declaration" and a > > > > function > > > > "implementation". > > > > > > Read the C style guide on the web site and try again. > > > > Irrelevant as long as nearly all current code in ON is similar to mine. > > > > There is a lot of code in ON gate which was written and integrated > before "C style" was published. Such code is improved if the relevant > part of source code is touched. Nobody will invest time to reformat all > at once, of course. But including new code with different "C style" will > not make the "C style" of ON gate better, but worse. > > Even some new code introduced to the ON gate is not following the "C > style". I know two reasons for it (maybe there are others):
I am sorry but these so called "requirements" cannot be discussed as they are a step backwards. What James asked me to do is not based on technical requirements but just rather burocratic. My code meets all the thechnical requirements that are behind what James asked me to do, so there is no need for a change. The main difference is that I am writing portable code and the code in ON is non-portable. I will of course not give up the portability of my code. If you are interested in a collaboration, you could get a lot of interesting things from me as I did e.g. take old code from Sun and did rewrite it in order to make it portable and in order to convert it to modern code that e.g. provides prototypes for _all_ functions. I am sure that if you are interested in the future of Solaris, you will be interested in using my enhanced code. All my code is also correctly working when compiled for 64 bits, Sun's majority of the code is definitely missbehaving if compiled for 64 bits. I am willing to provide enhanced code for "sh", "diff" and "sccs" interested? Jörg -- EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [email protected] (uni) [email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
