This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the newlib project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: getopt reinvocation/reentrancy

I got the definition of the GETOPT_DATA_INITIALIZER macro from that old libc manual that Joel provided the link for: .

As far as the other #defines, I just think that having non-masking macros in lowercase looks icky. But that's a matter of style, not substance.


Jeff Johnston wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 19:21 -0500, Gregory Pietsch wrote:
I believe that I caught the problem. In your test program, the -a and -b switches weren't defined in your list of short options, so getopt was returning a question mark. Fixing the testing program and applying the latest Bug-Free(tm) getopt should work. -- Gregory

I think, some defines, you added to getopt.h with your most recent patch should be removed. In particular:

/* macros defined by this include file */
#define NO_ARG                  0
#define REQUIRED_ARG            1
#define OPTIONAL_ARG            2
  /* The GETOPT_DATA_INITIALIZER macro is used to initialize a
     allocated variable of type struct getopt_data.  */
#define GETOPT_DATA_INITIALIZER {0,0,0,0,0}


- The *_ARG macros are not name-space safe and likely to clash with
other macros. If they really should be kept, then they should be
prefixed with __GETOPT_.

To be fair, the header file itself is non-standard; it is a glibc extension and any application that includes it will need the non-standard bits (one can get getopt() already through unistd.h). The glibc version of <getopt.h> includes 3 macros: no_argument, required_argument, optional_argument that are unprotected. The sys/linux version of getopt.h defines the 3 glibc macros as well for compatibility and so should the libc/include version. I'd be happy with only having the glibc names. Joel, as one of probably few getopt.h/getopt users, do you think it would be reasonable to make this change?

I think that GETOPT_DATA_INITIALIZER should be underscored since it is our own invention and is current. I'll do that plus add the glibc macros.
- All of these macros are not standardized anywhere nor am I aware about
any system providing them. I vote for removing them.

Glibc extension.

-- Jeff J.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]