[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121021004841.GY254@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:48:41 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Import BSD functions defined in
<netinet/ether.h> from NetBSD
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 02:52:21AM +0200, Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE wrote:
> >why do you duplicate the code and not use simply the _r functions from [4/4] with the static buffer ?
> >btw the usage of sscanf is both bloated and slow.
>
> This was for record of the original code from NetBSD, before
> patching it in [4/4]
Understood.
> >anyway, i doubt it makes sense to add this crap; i never needed it
> >for sabotage which is almost feature complete and compiles 250
> >packages.
>
> I can not argue with this kind of comments.
Apologies; some members of our community are a bit abrasive at times,
and I think your initial insistence on the cdefs.h thing (which was
discussed to death in the past) got a few ppl irritated.
I have no objection to the basic functionality as long as it's done in
a way that's clean and unobtrusive. I think it would be nice to know
what apps/libs need it though, as a justification. Additions like this
(i.e. functions not required by the standards and not widely used)
should be documented as added "because it's needed by such-and-such"
rather than "just because we can".
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
