Arjan van de Ven wrote:
struct _LA(whatever) {
int foo;
int bar;
};
struct _LA(another) {
...
};
this is a good sign that this is all very over designed :)
It's an eyesore, isn't it? :)
namespace pollution is perhaps evil, but we also should not overreact.
Especially for struct names. *IF* they are in a "narrow enough" header,
the user of the header knows what he is doing, and accepts these to be
in his namespace.
This is true for a small enough application. But things grow, libraries
are added, and includes keep pulling other includes in. Sooner or later
you'll have a collision.
The problem is things like u64 etc that is VERY common in all headers,
but then again __u64 etc are just fine, history has proven that already.
Agree. But to be on the safe side one can use uint64_t and friends
(which the kernel can typedef to u64 and first degree relatives)
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
