Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 21:20:40 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: function name collision on "getcontext" with ports/editors/joe Message-ID: <20020212211137.F3838-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10202111917370.2413-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > <<On Mon, 11 Feb 2002 12:16:44 -0500 (EST), Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> said: > > > > > How do you easily forward declare something that is a typedef? > > > > There is a reason style(9) says not to use such typedefs. > > Unfortunately, this one it written into a standard. Since We Are The > > Implementation, there is no difficulty in simply writing the > > appropriate structure type into the relevant declarations. > > OK, thanks. I believe there is a difficulty: POSIX at least used to require applications to be able to declare prototypes for functions in POSIX headers using lexically the same definition as in the standard. In the case of ucontext_t, this might not be a problem, since the implementation can declare ucontext_t as an incomplete struct type. The both the implementation and applications can use ucontext_t * in prototypes. OTOH, sigreturn() is not a POSIX function so the POSIX rules don't apply directly. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020212211137.F3838-100000>