> c. I have not used > #define sigaction (a, b, c) > Instead used a blank function definition, and a couple of blank > structures to keep things readable.
Good. A function is better, when the stronger parameter type checking doesn't cause trouble. I have to lose the macro reflex. But make the function be "static inline".
I thought the stronger type-checking was a plus. :-)
I find it more readable when cpp directives are indented according to their nesting level. E.g. #ifndef SA_SIGINFO # ifndef HAVE_SIGACTION and #ifndef SEGV_MAPERR # define SEGV_MAPERR INTMAX - 1 #endif
That is true, however I did not do it purpsefully since this style is not followed uniformly everywhere in the Parted code. What I shall do is indent the newly introduced pre-processor statements, and the fix the rest in a later patch. What should be the indentation depth? The same 8 spaces or something else?
Whoops. The above (and all the others) should parenthesize the sum:
Sorry. Careless mistake on my part.
A simple rule: a syntax-only change should always be in delta separate from any semantic change.
Ok. Happy hacking, Debarshi -- GPG key ID: 63D4A5A7 Key server: pgp.mit.edu _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
