Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:31:10 -0700
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Marius Strobl <marius@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r226947 - in head/sys: dev/esp sparc64/sbus
Message-ID:  <4EAE248E.1060507@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20111031042526.GA57014@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201110302117.p9ULHgLD085245@svn.freebsd.org> <20111031042526.GA57014@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/30/11 9:25 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 09:17:42PM +0000, Marius Strobl wrote:
>> Author: marius
>> Date: Sun Oct 30 21:17:42 2011
>> New Revision: 226947
>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/226947
>>
>> Log:
>>    - Use device_t rather than the NetBSDish struct device.
> Hmm, I though that style(9) advises against this practice:
>
>      Avoid using typedefs for structure types.  Typedefs are problematic
>      because they do not properly hide their underlying type; [...]
>
>      When convention requires a typedef, make its name match the struct tag.
>      Avoid typedefs ending in _t, except as specified in Standard C or by
>      POSIX.
>
> Does these rules not apply for struct device for some reason?
>
> ./danfe
>
I agree we should be trying to get rid of the blah_t horrors. I think 
this went the wrong direction.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EAE248E.1060507>