Hi, On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 08:19:31PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > In my opinion, in order to avoid confusion there can be two options: > > 1. Use library functions as much as possible, providing the minimum > common ground > in compatibility layer if missing. This ensure applying fixes and > functionality from > various upstreams. > > 2. Use own implementation everywhere, taking responsibility and > control over the implementation > and maintenance. > > Mix is only confusing, and leads to even more errors.
In this two either-or extremes, this doesn't make sense.
Of course nobody wants to reimplement all library functions (except
djb, maybe, but we do not want to go there), but given some functions
with sufficiently vague or messy calling semantics, having a better
defined local implementation can improvide the code a lot.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
pgpaEOtE3KsyB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
