httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From André Malo ...@perlig.de>
Subject Re: svn commit: r293305 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules: dav/fs/dbm.c
Date Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:02:36 GMT
* Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 11:03:31AM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 08:38:02AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > > At the very last, if we are "assuming" behavior which is specifically
> > > implementation dependent, then a test during configure time that
> > > ensures sizeof(void *) <= sizeof(long) makes sense.
>  > 
> > > There is no room, IMO, for silent hidden assumptions in httpd.
> > 
> > How about;
> 
> -0.5, benefit is nil.
> 
> I don't think it's a good idea to clutter up configure with checks for 
> hypothetical platforms since the scope is unlimited and the build system 
> is fragile enough already.

Then let's write valid ANSI C plus POSIX. I don't see a benefit in
writing fragile code as well.

(In this particular example I don't see a valid reason to store boolean
stuff in a pointer at all. This is just bad. But perhaps I'm overlooking
something.)

> We could go through this forever; "hey, will 
> httpd work if sizeof(char) != 1?"  "hmm, doubt it, lets add a configure 
> check for that too" etc.

Huh? The standard specifies that sizeof(char) is always 1. So that is the
point to stop.

Just my EUR 0.02,
nd

Mime
View raw message