This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Summary of the "Use __unused0" discussion.
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos_odonell at mentor dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 22:40:23 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: Summary of the "Use __unused0" discussion.
- References: <4F2C5A65.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20120203221227.404162C086@topped-with-meat.com>
On Fri, 3 Feb 2012, Roland McGrath wrote:
> IMHO it's worthwhile to establish a convention for padding fields and do a
> single pass changing all uses to conform. __reservedN seems like a decent
> convention off hand. (Commence flame war about whether N starts at 0 or 1.)
If we're changing them all then I'd go for a convention that shows
unambiguously what part of the implementation owns that part of the
implementation namespace, e.g. __glibc_reservedN.
Joseph S. Myers