On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:38:20PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> i already did in the other thread -- apply the existing
> () rule. aka, avoid it unless it helps comprehension,
> which means simple sizeof can avoid it, but anything
> slightly complex should not. this means that all the
> fun
In article <6734.1617154...@splode.eterna.com.au>,
matthew green wrote:
>Christos Zoulas writes:
>> In article <20900.1616977...@splode.eterna.com.au>,
>> matthew green wrote:
>> >> Log Message:
>> >> Clarify and explain the rationale for parentheses in sizeof and return as
>> >> discussed.
>>
Christos Zoulas writes:
> In article <20900.1616977...@splode.eterna.com.au>,
> matthew green wrote:
> >> Log Message:
> >> Clarify and explain the rationale for parentheses in sizeof and return as
> >> discussed.
> >
> >+* a function call. We always parenthesize the sizeof expression
In article ,
John Klos wrote:
>Log Message:
>Use the same options like m4 (-g turns on GNU, -G turns off GNU) Suggested
>by uwe@
>
>It seems, based on comparing netbsd-9 and -current, that the default was
>-g (GNU on), and is now -G (GNU off). Should the default be mentioned in
>the man page?
Log Message:
Use the same options like m4 (-g turns on GNU, -G turns off GNU) Suggested
by uwe@
It seems, based on comparing netbsd-9 and -current, that the default was
-g (GNU on), and is now -G (GNU off). Should the default be mentioned in
the man page?
John
In article <20900.1616977...@splode.eterna.com.au>,
matthew green wrote:
>> Log Message:
>> Clarify and explain the rationale for parentheses in sizeof and return as
>> discussed.
>
>+* a function call. We always parenthesize the sizeof expression for
>+* consistency.
>
>i
