Hi Ingo, On 9/3/22 15:29, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
the only point i strongly care about is this one:
Manual pages should not use
* non-standard syntax
* non-portable syntax
* ambiguous syntax (i.e. syntax that might have different meanings
with different compilers or in different contexts)
* syntax that might be invalid or dangerous with some widely
used compiler collections like GCC or LLVM
The first two are good guidelines, but not strict IMHO if there's a good reason.
The third and fourth are a strong requirements. For now I won't be applying this patch.
Regarding the discussions about standardization and extensions, all proposals i have seen look seriously ugly and awkward to me, and i'm not yet convinced such ugliness is sufficiently offset by the relatively minor benefit that is apparent to me right now.
I hope we come up with something not ugly from that discussion.The static analysis / compiler warning capabilities of using VLA syntax seem strong reasons to me. They help avoid stupid bugs, even for careless programmers (well, only if those careless programmers care just enough to enable -Wall, and then to read the warnings). Not something that will fix an incorrect algorithm, but can stop some typos, or other stupid mistakes that we all do from time to time.
Cheers, Alex -- Alejandro Colomar <http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
