Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:21:07 +0100 (CET) From: Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@cup.hp.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: %a and %A formats Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10012140114380.40957-100000@login-1.eunet.no> In-Reply-To: <3A37CB39.C2E8AA67@cup.hp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Using indexes to refer to the arguments (vectors) has an advantage for > i18n. The order of the arguments is related to the language and some > translations produce better messages if the order of the arguments isn't > fixed. Indeed. An alternate mechanism would be to supply a (void *) key which refers to the key, and have argument/property descriptors. But that is overkill, I suppose. > Other than that, I think I prefer a one line printf() over a 7 line > say() anytime :-) And most prefer a simple 'goto bad;' over a full switch statement to handle errors. :). It is a matter of flexibility. Also, one introduces a generic way to pass vectors and variable arguments w/descriptors. I doubt code readability suffers. A number of subsystems could benefit from this, esp. if the keying was used as well. Take the vnode ops, for example. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10012140114380.40957-100000>