>
> > Would it not make more sense to fix the problem at its root rather than
> > creating a new one, and claiming that's OK since it's how it was done in
> > the past?
>
> Yes, but I wasn't sure how attached people are to done(). I've heard
> no comments made in its favour, so perhaps I can propose a different,
> more genuine fix I have in mind.
Indeed.
>
> What I'd really like to do is get rid of sbr/done.c and the done()
> declaration in h/prototypes.h altogether, replacing uses of *that*
> done() definition with an equivalent return where it appears in main(),
> and a use of exit() everywhere else.
>
> For the uses of done() that refer to different definitions, I'd like to
> make it a static function in that translation unit. I'm also toying with
> the idea of pulling the exit() call out of those specialised done()s
> and placing them after the done() calls wherever they occur (if not even
> further up the call stack), but I don't like the danger of someone writing
> a call to a done() (or whatever) which is not followed by an exit().
>
This sounds much more reasonable, and should fall in line with the fabled
plan to clean up the code.
Thanks.
--
JB
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
