This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc 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: bits/libc-tsd.h, bits/atomic.h and other non-installed headers?


> Or, perhaps even the other way round: have installed headers in
> installed/ subdirectories, for stating this explicitly, and anything else
> being local?  Would that also help with more easily doing repository-wide
> checking of the installed headers for namespace-cleanness and such
> things?

If there is a convention that reliably distinguishes installed from
non-installed headers (when one is looking at the header itself), it
really doesn't matter which direction it goes.  If one wanted the
convention also to distinguish them when one is looking at an #include
in a source file, then Joseph's point would go to that.  Personally,
I am only really concerned about the former.


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