From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6159 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2009 14:27:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 6151 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2009 14:27:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:27:21 +0000 Received: (qmail 19678 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2009 14:27:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 18 Feb 2009 14:27:19 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: Fix most -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations warnings Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 17:34:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200902180201.05118.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200902181012.n1IAC3ow025364@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <200902181012.n1IAC3ow025364@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902181425.13598.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-02/txt/msg00381.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 18 February 2009 10:12:03, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > From: Pedro Alves > > Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 02:01:04 +0000 > > > > 3) several cases of _initialize_foo not being declared. > > > > +/* -Wmissing-prototypes */ > > +extern initialize_file_ftype _initialize_cli_logging; > > + > > I absolutely detest using initialize_file_ftype for this, since my > brain fails to parse this as a function prototype. I'm guessing you detest all function pointer variable declarations as well then. I'm quite sure you're capable of getting used to it as well, as this is valid C syntax anyway. You probably have already, since you hate it so much, but you're probably in denial. :-) I disagree with you here, and, I absolutelly love using _initialize_file_ftype for this. The difference between: extern initialize_file_ftype _initialize_foo; void _initialize_foo (void) {} ... and: void _initialize_foo (void); void _initialize_foo (void) {} Is that with the former, if the _initializer_BAR functions prototype needs to change, we change initialize_file_ftype, and all correctly declared and prototypes functions will fail to compile, whereas with the latter form, you may miss the change. the compiler will not help you. So, I claim that all those instance *not* using initialize_file_ftype are wrong. > > And, the GNU coding standards still demand full sentences, so in the > past I've written stuff like: > > /* Provide a prototype to silence -Wmissing-prototypes. */ > void _initialize_i386_tdep (void); > > I don't feel too strongly about the last point, but it'd be nice to > see consistency here. > Well, I happened to copy paste from one of the instances that does that already, vis (before my patch): >grep missing-prototypes * -rn | grep -v "ChangeLog" | grep Provide | wc -l 74 >grep initialize_file_ftype * -rn| grep -v ChangeLog | wc -l 61 (after my patch, there are 84 instances of the _ftype form) Most, if not all the initialize_file_ftype variants use shorter description. It's a bit pedantic, but I'll adjust to use the full sentence in the comment for the ones I'm adding. -- Pedro Alves