Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] KABI example conversion and cleanup

Avi Kivity
2006-03-26T17:57:46Z

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> struct _LA(whatever) {
>> int foo;
>> int bar;
>> };
>>
>> struct _LA(another) {
>> ...
>> };
>>
>
> this is a good sign that this is all very over designed :)
>
>
It's an eyesore, isn't it? :)
> namespace pollution is perhaps evil, but we also should not overreact.
> Especially for struct names. *IF* they are in a "narrow enough" header,
> the user of the header knows what he is doing, and accepts these to be
> in his namespace.
>
This is true for a small enough application. But things grow, libraries
are added, and includes keep pulling other includes in. Sooner or later
you'll have a collision.
> The problem is things like u64 etc that is VERY common in all headers,
> but then again __u64 etc are just fine, history has proven that already.
>
Agree. But to be on the safe side one can use uint64_t and friends
(which the kernel can typedef to u64 and first degree relatives)

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function