Subject: Re: Why is using "inline" as a variable name a parse error for our compiler? ...
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: John Birrell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/19/1995 18:14:16
> >>> NetBSD's cc is basically gcc, and in gcc "inline" is a language
> >>> keyword. [...]
> >> What about using either -ansi or -ansi -pedantic?
> >> I think -ansi disables most of the GNU extensions.
> > Using -traditional certainly should. (And it should still work
> > equally well with most NetBSD code too, right guys? 0.0 ;-))
> Unfortunately so. I really wish people would drop the non-prototyped
> compatability thing...
I agree. Prototypes *really do* help.
> compatability thing...for example, my last message to current-users
> describes a bug that never would have happened if the kernel had been
> built with -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes (and either -Werror
> or the discipline to not ignore the warnings).
Why *really* get disciplined and use -Wall? I tried this when I first looked
at NetBSD and I can tell you it's not a pretty sight!
We always use -Wall and our programmers haven't done their job if there are
any warnings on any platform (including 16, 32 and 64 bit machines). I'd like
to see NetBSD do the same.
> der Mouse
John Birrell CIMlogic Pty Ltd
email@example.com 119 Cecil Street
Ph +61 3 9690 9600 South Melbourne Vic 3205
Fax +61 3 9690 6900 Australia
Mob +61 18 353 137