apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/memory/unix apr_pools.c
Date Thu, 07 Oct 2004 21:06:17 GMT
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:04:22PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 04:54:13PM -0400, Allan Edwards wrote:
> > Joe Orton wrote:
> > >Why is this a macro? It's not like apr_uint32_t is a name which is going
> > >to change any time soon?
> > 
> > It's a macro because we don't want to lose sight of the
> > fact that we did something there that we utimately want to
> > back out (i.e. in APR 2.0 when we can change the API). If
> > we used apr_uint32_t it would be easy to lose track of
> > these places - make sense?
> 
> The fact that these casts are unnecessary can be tracked using comments,
> a list of issues in STATUS, or, not wishing to rock the boat, bugzilla.
> Using a macro just obfuscates the code.

s/unnecessary/undesirable/


Mime
View raw message