[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: stop using P_, __P in header files
From: |
Dan Nicolaescu |
Subject: |
Re: stop using P_, __P in header files |
Date: |
Mon, 05 Jul 2010 01:51:28 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) |
Ken Raeburn <address@hidden> writes:
> On Jul 4, 2010, at 12:46, Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
>> There are some remaining issues to solve:
>>
>> - DEFUNs need to be converted by hand, protoize does not know anything about
>> them.
>
> (By *hand*?? Ugh. We really need a tool that implements some kind of
> editing macros... :-)
The macros don't just exist, so manual work is needed as opposed to
just running protoize for most of the rest. :-)
> Also, I believe make-docfile scans the argument lists; it may need to be
> taught about the new syntax.
Good point. If you are familiar with that code, please do it.
> Or, the explicit old-style argument declarations can go away, and
> DEFUN can be taught how to expand a list of argument names into a
> list of new-style argument declarations. I thought about doing this
> back in May when we were discussing the DOC file name handling and
> version number definition; I think it would require making a bunch
> of helper macros for each MAXARGS value that could get passed. (I
> was thinking about it in the context of putting the doc strings in a
> section of the executable that only gets paged in when needed on
> most platforms, rather than having to copy them to and then load
> from a separate file.)
>> - the error and message functions in lisp.h are called with variable
>> number of arguments, but are defined with a fixed number of arguments.
>
> They should probably be fixed to be standard variadic functions, which means
> doprnt() has to be taught about va_arg. I can take a shot at that, if no one
> else feels like it; it's probably easy.
Please do. [I have a patch to turn on -Wstrict-prototypes by default
if available, but it would produce 4 warnings per file including
lisp.h, so it won't be very popular until the above is fixed].
Something also needs to be done about the type for lisp.h:Lisp_Subr.function
> We could also probably ditch the "register" declarations that date
> back to pre-GCC days; do they do *any* good now?
Very likely no.
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, (continued)
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Dan Nicolaescu, 2010/07/05
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Dan Nicolaescu, 2010/07/09
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, David Kastrup, 2010/07/10
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/07/10
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Ken Raeburn, 2010/07/04
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/07/06
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Ken Raeburn, 2010/07/06
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/07/06
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files,
Dan Nicolaescu <=
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Ken Raeburn, 2010/07/05
- Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Dan Nicolaescu, 2010/07/05
Re: stop using P_, __P in header files, Andreas Schwab, 2010/07/02