This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Ping Re: Fix more namespace issues in sys/ucontext.h (bug 21457)
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 08:30:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: Ping Re: Fix more namespace issues in sys/ucontext.h (bug 21457)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fweimer at redhat dot com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com ECC523DEEB
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com ECC523DEEB
- References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705161742240.14609@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1705221132250.21862@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAKCAbMidoO2AmiSH0rjLPuRHApHQK=0HmFJjgAkLu584rHPOzQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/23/2017 12:54 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> So I'm OK with __ versions of NGREG, NFPREG, etc, but is it really
> necessary to mangle structure field names? Is it just to defend
> against user definitions of those identifiers as preprocessor macros,
I think this is sufficient reason to do it, unfortunately.
> or is there a more likely-to-happen-in-real-code reason, given the
> general tendency to avoid object-like macros nowadays?
I don't think that tendency exists. Maybe for some projects, but not
for glibc's upstreams (standards).
Thanks,
Florian