Alan Coopersmith wrote: > From a comment in a patch Peter recently submitted: >> libXpm is one of the libraries that still could need ANSIfication, >> I'd offer some help if you tell me to do so.
It is not "ansified", but it doesn't have problematic functions, i.e. K&R prototypes with char/short/float arguments/return-type like libX11. But libX11 has it only on non public or hard to get access to, locale related functions. > And this has come up on #xorg-devel recently and in patches submitted by > Paulo in the past...(and probably a couple times a year since we started > X.Org)... > > In general, I think everyone agrees conversion of the remaining bits > of code that use K&R/pre-ANSI-C89 style function prototypes & declarations > to C89 is a good thing (provided it's done correctly [1]), but that none > of the people doing most of the work on Xorg have much time to help with it. > The same applies to much other "janitorial" type work, like cleaning up > gcc warnings and all the bugs with the janitor keyword ([2]), and all the > patches sitting in bugzilla ([3]) or the mailing list archives. We get > patches > submitted by people like Paulo & Peter, and while some of us try to get > through > the backlog in our spare time, the backlog of them grows faster than we can > get > time to get through them. xorg/app/<old-xt-xaw-applications> is a good place to "practice" ansification :-) > I'd really like to encourage the people who want to tackle these issues to get > someone to help them apply their first few patches, then apply for git commit > access so you can commit them directly, because if you wait for the few of us > trawling the submitted patches to get to them, many of your patches will be > uselessly out-of-sync with the code by the time we get to them and you'll be > seeing those errors for months or longer until we do. I closed most "ansification" bugreports opened by me, as I was not sure it was intended to actually work on it; I only applied patches that actually corrected real problems. The patches should still be available, on the closed bug reports (at some point I think I had like 50 of these patches open). One place that I did not submit patches was the X Server, as I wanted it to be done after having my "visibility" patches applied first, as those, while not adding a "real visible functionality" add the oportunity to have a more clean sdk, with only what is expected to be visible by outside modules, actually visible, and all the other benefits :-) > If someone wanted to organize a "janitorial squad" to tackle these and help > new people work through them to get to the point where they were ready for > commit access, we'd love you forever (or at least until you turn us down > when we then volunteer you to be the next release manager). > > [1] http://invisible-island.net/ansification/index.html > [2] 41 open bugs: > http://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?keywords=janitor&product=Xorg&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED > [3] 122 open bugs, though many patches aren't keyworded: > http://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?keywords=patch&product=Xorg&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED > Paulo _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
