Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> Here is a diff, also make %p better
that looks better. sigh. why does this even exist?
Here is a diff, also make %p better
Index: shf.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ksh/shf.c,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -p -r1.17 shf.c
--- shf.c 13 Sep 2015 19:43:42 - 1.17
+++ shf.c 14 Sep 2015 07:47:02 -
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 08:45:43PM -0400, Michael McConville wrote:
> Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> > Works for me. ok anyone?
> >
> > I think ksh_limval.h can go entirely after this, per the note in
> > PROJECTS.
>
> I also just found this gem. It only has one use, so it can probably be
>
Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Michael McConville wrote:
> > To be (far) more specific, it's used to enable the 'e', 'g', and 'f'
> > fields of ksh's vfprintf() clone. On one hand, this can't be too
> > important if it was disabled for >10 years. On the other, the code
> > at least compiles...
>
>
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 23:41:40 -0400, Michael McConville wrote:
> To be (far) more specific, it's used to enable the 'e', 'g', and 'f'
> fields of ksh's vfprintf() clone. On one hand, this can't be too
> important if it was disabled for >10 years. On the other, the code at
> least compiles...
When
Works for me. ok anyone?
I think ksh_limval.h can go entirely after this, per the note in
PROJECTS.
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 03:00:02PM -0400, Michael McConville wrote:
> Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> > I would kill it. FPBUF_SIZE and DMAXEXP can go too.
>
> Here's the diff:
>
>
> Index:
Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> I would kill it. FPBUF_SIZE and DMAXEXP can go too.
Here's the diff:
Index: ksh_limval.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ksh/ksh_limval.h,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.2 ksh_limval.h
---
Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> Works for me. ok anyone?
>
> I think ksh_limval.h can go entirely after this, per the note in
> PROJECTS.
If we're in the business of deleting files, bin/ksh/INSTALL describes
itself with the following:
> [This file is the generic GNU autoconf/configure installation
>
Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> Works for me. ok anyone?
>
> I think ksh_limval.h can go entirely after this, per the note in
> PROJECTS.
I also just found this gem. It only has one use, so it can probably be
replaced. Am I interpreting it correctly?
Index: shf.c
I would kill it. FPBUF_SIZE and DMAXEXP can go too.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 11:41:40PM -0400, Michael McConville wrote:
> Michael McConville wrote:
> > FP has been undefined for at least ten years, and probably forever.
> > It's used to conditionally add two small sections and one large
> >
FP has been undefined for at least ten years, and probably forever. It's
used to conditionally add two small sections and one large section of
shf.c.
My initial reaction is that FP should be removed. Is there any reason to
keep it? Should the associated code stay or go?
Michael McConville wrote:
> FP has been undefined for at least ten years, and probably forever.
> It's used to conditionally add two small sections and one large
> section of shf.c.
>
> My initial reaction is that FP should be removed. Is there any reason
> to keep it? Should the associated code
12 matches
Mail list logo
