bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#1483: cleanup: replace NO_SOCKETS_IN_FILE_SYSTEM in emacsclient.c


From: Dan Nicolaescu
Subject: bug#1483: cleanup: replace NO_SOCKETS_IN_FILE_SYSTEM in emacsclient.c
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 14:03:45 -0800 (PST)

"Juanma Barranquero" <address@hidden> writes:

  > On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 20:15, Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden> wrote:
  > 
  > > should only need a single #ifdef.
  > 
  > Why?

Because it's simpler. 

  > > The clear precedent is that WINDOWSNT already encompasses a bazillion
  > > features, why would a bazillion + 1 won't make any difference?
  > 
  > As Eli pointed out, we should be moving towards decreasing the
  > bazillion things conflated into #ifdef WINDOWSNT, not increasing them.

Good luck convincing anyone about that.  There are 378 undocumented
macros in admin/CPP-DEFINES, and probably 1000-2000 in use in src/*,
increasing that number does not seem such a hot idea.

  > > It would
  > > make a difference for the vast majority of people that write to the
  > > emacs repository, most do not use windows and can just ignore the #ifdef
  > > WINDOWSNT code.
  > 
  > Apparently it's not that confusing. There has been no complain until
  > now from the people who's hacked on emacsclient.

This is not a valid proof.  Maybe people didn't want to complain, or
didn't figure out the difference, etc.

  > > On a not so related note, why are there #includes on line 671 in
  > > emacsclient.c instead of at the beginning of the file?
  > 
  > Because they affect code inside a big #else which goes from there to
  > the end of the file.
  > 
  > They were already there before the TCP socket support, indeed from
  > version 1.1 of the file (though it was line 49 back then...)

Still not too good, and a deviation from the normal style of not having
includes in the middle of the file.






reply via email to

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