From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 8 16:47:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 451961065677 for ; Thu, 8 May 2008 16:47:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@britannica.bec.de) Received: from www.pkgsrc-box.org (www.ostsee-abc.de [62.206.222.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BB78FC16 for ; Thu, 8 May 2008 16:47:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@britannica.bec.de) Received: from britannica.bec.de (www.pkgsrc-box.org [127.0.0.1]) by www.pkgsrc-box.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6A6E506AA for ; Thu, 8 May 2008 16:47:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by britannica.bec.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 76BEF16FC2; Thu, 8 May 2008 18:47:26 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 18:47:26 +0200 From: Joerg Sonnenberger To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080508164726.GA2596@britannica.bec.de> References: <200805051603.m45G3rrN089219@repoman.freebsd.org> <200805051637.43073.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080507064013.GU32532@elvis.mu.org> <200805071111.39938.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080507231444.GF32532@elvis.mu.org> <18466.22969.506620.244442@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include stdio.h src/lib/libc/stdio clrerr.c feof.c ferror.c fileno.c getc.c getchar.c local.h putc.c putchar.c xprintf.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 16:47:37 -0000 On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 05:18:23PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > On Wed, 7 May 2008, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > > > I like the idea of making FILE opaque > > The C standard requires that FILE is an object type which means that it > must not be opaque. (Opaque structures are incomplete types, which are > not object types.) The C standard is also quite explicit that anything but sizeof(FILE) is implementation defined. I have not found a single reason why sizeof(FILE) should be valid. I believe that is not intended by the standard. Joerg