Re: [Nmh-workers] m_getfld

[Paul Vixie]

On 2012-12-10 2:17 AM, David Levine wrote:
> Paul V. wrote:
>
>> Given  that  we no longer use pdp11, we can afford the code space of a
>> config  file  reader  that  knows  comments and lacks the other rfc822
>> features  not  used in config files and has reasonable error messages.
>> Let's  start  by  removing  those  callers  of  getfld  by giving them
>> something better to call instead.
> Yes!

i'm taking that as approval by people who will variously do the work of:

1. getting all non-rfc822-reading callers of m_getfld() to call
something else;
2. removing any m_getfld code that was just for those callers, even if
it means removing arguments from all other calls to m_getfld;
3. teaching m_getfld to never try to go behind the veil of stdio's api;
4. teaching m_getfld to stop optimizing for the vax pcc.

this would be a gigantic improvement, droll though it sounds here. if
m_getfld only did one thing, portably, then we could look very hard at
it and decide if a different api would serve that one purpose better.

right now the hairball is both above and below the m_getfld call frame.

paul