Jens Schweikhardt wrote: > Software correctness is more complex than strict adherence to ISO C letters.
I agree to this argument. > One aspect we value more is not invading the app name space. This "invasion" is unavoidable. We should look for potential conflicts from the reserved area for C/C++ compilers. > If you only realized that part of VirtualBox could be treated as part of > the implementation, your issue immediately becomes a non-issue. Which source files can be specified to be part of a C/C++ compiler? > Sure, there's other opportunity for quality assurance, e.g removing the > last few warnings, using lint, etc that's on our TODO list which is far > more likely fixing real problems instead of perceived ones. It is normal that other open issues usually get a higher priority. > To paraphrase a valuable engineering guideline: We're not fixing things > that ain't broken. I have got the view that the wrong application of naming conventions might result in errors. Can this aspect become a security concern during a detailed source code review? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ vbox-dev mailing list [email protected] http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
