On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> wrote: > -------- > In message > <CABoVN9ADMWEfJtP1epOO_s==kgorzb_jk8smvuhtrtvmwrz...@mail.gmail.com>, Dridi > Boukelmoune writes: > >>If you don't like the idea of the union type, there's a typo you can fix with: > > I do indeed not like unions. > > I use them only when they are absolutely necessary to share a memory > allocation > is a quasi-type-safe way, where the chances of f**kups are well handled in > other > ways. > > I never use them to pretend I have type-safety on a single pointer.
It was never about safety, but readability. With many NULLs in the code, I need to go other places to fully understand a piece of code. Named argument make sometimes things more explicit: - VCL_recv_method(req->vcl, wrk, req, NULL, NULL); + VCL_recv_method(req->vcl, wrk, req, NULL, no_specific); I also just assumed switching to a union type would not add overhead in the compiled binary. Cheers, Dridi >> sed -i s/SHA256ctx/SHA256Context/ include/vrt.h > > done. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > [email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
