[#3479] Missing .document files for ext/ libraries — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>

The ri documentation for zlib, strscan and iconv doesn't get built by 'make

12 messages 2004/10/06

[#3492] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Markus <markus@...>

> In message "Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch"

15 messages 2004/10/11
[#3493] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2004/10/11

Hi,

[#3495] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Markus <markus@...> 2004/10/12

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 16:16, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#3561] 1.8.2 - what can we do to help? — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Folks:

23 messages 2004/10/26
[#3562] Re: 1.8.2 - what can we do to help? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2004/10/27

Hi,

Kernighan & Richie ---> prototypes ?

From: Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
Date: 2004-10-13 17:37:23 UTC
List: ruby-core #3517
Hi !

The Ruby source code mostly uses non-prototype declarations of
functions (a.k.a. "Kernighan & Richie" declarations).

But a number of files uses prototypes. At least the following files
as far as I can see:

    euc_jp.c, main.c, regcomp.c, regenc.c, regerror.c, regexec.c,
    regparse.c, sjis.c, st.c, utf8.c, util.c, win32/win32.c

That must mean that the old-style is just a "rest of the past",
and Ruby will not compile with a pre-prototype compiler any more.
Correct ?

Considering this, and the fact that prototypes actually *help* the
programmer to write correct code, I wonder:

  What is holding back a conversion of the K&R code
  to use prototypes ?

I would be willing to try to help with the conversion if time is the
only reason it hasn't been done yet. I think it would be a good
thing to get rid of the old K&R style of code. I was recently bitten
by the lack of type-checking in K&R code when I prepared a patch to
the Ruby source, and it felt so unnecessary ....

I see in the list archives that almost the same question was asked
by Michal Rokos a couple of months ago. But I couldn't find any
answer that time.

/Johan Holmberg


In This Thread

Prev Next