On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 09:58 -0700, Wes Hardaker wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:23:04 +0100, Dave Shield > >>>>> <d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk> said: > > DS> Though there is still the question of why these APIs are using > DS> "struct netsnmp_transport_s" > DS> in the first place, rather than > DS> "netsnmp_transport " > DS> (which is the naming style used for all other structures) > > I suspect history is to blame :-) > > They're not consistent. I wouldn't mind changing them consistently to > the other way, but if we do that Bill has already shown that we should > probably make sure the types.h file is included at the top.
I have been toying with this test recently but not committed it as of yet. It do catch the bug Bill found and some more but I might be missing some include. Is it a good test case? Should I commit it?
T210compile_headers_simple
Description: application/shellscript
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
_______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
