On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:55:05 -0400
Igor Korot <ikoro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But then why not give it some default value ("0" maybe") and default
> it to "1" only if needed during configure?
Because complexity. It takes effort --- unnecessary effort -- to set
up that default. That effort could introduce an error, whereas no
effort *cannot* introduce an error. Less is more.
The assumption on the part of the guideline authors seems to be that if
something is undefined, it might have been overlooked, and the best way
to make sure it's not overlooked is by ensuring there's always an
explicit definition. That's a debatable proposition. The mere fact
something is defined in no wise ensures it is defined correctly.
In this case, the tools themselves provide the definition. For those
that do, the code compiles one way. For those that do not, another
way. It's entirely automatic. How could supplying those definitions
manually be an improvement?
--jkl
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
