Re: [PATCH v1] Port ndbm

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:45 PM Yaakov Selkowitz <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 13:30 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:59 PM Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 12:44 -0400, Craig Howland via newlib wrote:
> > > > This is POSIX XSI.  Shouldn't there be some kind of gate?  (Or since
> the entire
> > > > header is under XSI, no gate is needed since the user controls it on
> a file
> > > > level?  I prefer this, but I don't know what general Newlib policy
> is, as most
> > > > are mixed in and need individual gates.)
> > >
> > > The latter.
> >
> > Just to be clear, you are wanting gates around individual (or small
> groups
> > of) methods?
>
> Gating is only necessary when some parts of a header are governed by
> different standards than other parts therein (e.g. XSI or GNU
> extensions to an ANSI header).  Gating is NOT necessary when an entire
> header is governed by a later standard and not included by other
> standard headers, as the #include itself is essentially the gate.
>
>
Thanks. Have we missed any issues with this patch that need to be addressed?

Also when I regenerated with autoconf 2.69 instead of 2.68 from libc, there
were over 3K lines in the diff. The build worked but I assume someone who
regularly regenerates the files will want to do this.




> --
> Yaakov Selkowitz
> Senior Software Engineer - Platform Enablement
> Red Hat, Inc.
>
>
>