If the hardcoded 4096 is used for a path buffer, then it should definitely get changed to PATH_MAX. Other arbitrary buffers should get a define that is appropriate for their buffers. 4096 is a fine number, but a define would make it easier to change and allow us to document why the buffer is that size. Even something like:
/* Need an arbitrary buffer size big enough to hold strings we're building */ #define BIG_BUFFER_SIZE 4096 But in most cases something describing the reasoning behind the specific size would be better. On 3/1/07, Christopher Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey all, > > While reading through E (wm) code, I noticed that in some places > PATH_MAX is used and in others 4096 is used (ie: char buf[4096])... > I undestand what path_max is/does and how it relates to different > systems...my question is Do we have a preference as to which ?? > > I don't mind doing the leg work on this to correct everything and get it > consistent. > > Cheers, > dh > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
