savannah-hackers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Savannah-hackers] Commits mailing lists


From: Camm Maguire
Subject: [Savannah-hackers] Commits mailing lists
Date: 02 Jul 2004 10:19:01 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

Greetings!

Mike Thomas <address@hidden> writes:

> Thanks Camm.
> 
> I must have accidentally deleted this email (who knows how many
> others) at work before seeing it - I'm overwhelmed by spam there, I
> think through carelessness with my address on public forums.  The
> problem with my home address is that I often go for days without
> looking at it as in this case.
> 
> Have you been told about when they will revive the commits mailing
> list if at all?
> 

They have indicated to me that it is very difficult.  No timeline is
set to my knowledge.  Am forwarding this to those in charge to recheck
the status.

Take care,

> Cheers
> 
> Mike Thomas
> 
> Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Hi Mike!  A few thoughts on your latest commits:
> > 1) I *very* much appreciate the care you are taking not to break
> > other
> >    platforms with your use of #ifdefs around function declarations,
> >    etc.   This is working out very well in my opinion -- i.e. there
> >    are few if any collisions.
> > 2) In this case, your observation about the handler_function_type is
> >    correct on all platforms.  The function types have all been
> >    traditionally declared void/int (*)() for two reasons (that I can
> >    see)
> >         a) because early versions of the C compiler could not process
> >         argument types in function variables
> >         b) because in certain circumstances, the argument types are
> >         unknown, i.e. can legitimately take on several forms
> >    b) is not applicable here, so I've implemented your void (*)(int)
> >    across the board.     If you are ever in doubt and want to fire
> > off a note to me on
> >    issues like this, we can begin to thin out the ifdefs.
> > 3) FEerror takes a second argument which indicates the number of
> >    printf-like arguments needed to format the error string.  In the
> >    cases you've added to pathname.d, there are no format control
> >    strings, so 0 is appropriate here, as far as I can tell.  Harmless
> >    the way you had it, just led to a compiler warning and uses up a
> >    little extra stack space.
> > Take care,
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Camm Maguire                                            address@hidden
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]