Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 21:04:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com> To: ponds!time.cdrom.com!jkh, ponds!lambert.org!terry Cc: ponds!zeta.org.au!bde, ponds!FreeBSD.ORG!hackers, ponds!barcode.co.il!nadav Subject: Re: /usr/include/ftpio.h is not C++ safe Message-ID: <199705060104.VAA29952@lakes.water.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > How can libftpio be used by code which must be compiled -traditional, > > > without __P()? > > > > And why would you want to compile libftpio with -traditional? > > I read the paragraph where you say: > > > > In addition, there are cases where old code must be compiled with > > the -traditional flag (I think this is what Bruce was meaning here) > > because of existing calling conventions in the code, and the lack > > of a prototype in scope at the time of inter-object calling in the > > old code itself. > > > > And I still don't see where this is applicable in this case at all. > > You're still missing my (and I think Bruce's) meaning here. > > I *don't* want to compile libftpio -traditional. I want to add > "#include ftpio.h" and link libftpio to an older application which > must be compiled -traditional. To do that, the header must be > compilable with -traditional (ie: it needs __P()). > Didn't I just post about that *exact* situation two weeks ago :-) We already have the problem in our /usr/include files. Personally, I still have older code which has yet to be protoized, which may/may not want to enjoy the fruits of ftpio (or some other newer library). It would be nice not to have to rework things too much just to enhance older stuff... This, of course, is countered with being dragged kinking-and-screaming into the 1980s... :-) :-) maybe it's time to rework that code... - Dave Rivers -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705060104.VAA29952>