On 04:30 Mon 03 Jul     , Noud deBrouwer wrote:
> plz. point me the model-boundries we have now.

I finally took the time to demonstrate my point, but instead I proved
myself wrong. The code in the less essential src/games does NOT always
point to the best way of doing things. For example, the tetris included
with netbsd-1-6 uses the select() function in input.c:

i = 1;
switch (select(1, (fd_set *)&i, (fd_set *)0, (fd_set *)0, s)) {

}

This uses a bitwise operation for the fd_set field even though the man
page in every version of NetBSD describes the use of FD_ZERO and FD_SET
instead, largely because that is less implementation-dependant. These
macros are good. In OpenBSD this was corrected so that it looks like
this:

fd_set fds;

FD_ZERO(&fds);
FD_SET(STDIN_FILENO, &fds);
switch (select(STDIN_FILENO + 1, &fds, (fd_set *)0, (fd_set *)0, s)) {

}

The other thing I noticed is that nowhere in the source for tetris is
<sys/select.h> included. This has traditionally be defined in
<sys/time.h>, but it should probably be change to use select.h so that
it conforms to POSIX standards.

So what did happen?

From netbsd-1-6 to netbsd-2 select() was replaced with poll():

#include <sys/poll.h>

struct pollfd set[1];

set[0].fd = STDIN_FILENO;
set[0].events = POLLIN;
switch (poll(set, 1, s->tv_sec * 1000 + s->tv_usec / 1000)) {

}

Okay, that's fine, but there's nothing wrong with select(), is there?
Reading the CVS changelog leaves the impression that poll() preferred,
and thereby avoids demonstrating a simple, correct usage of select().

I officially retract my previous assertion that this is "model" code.
It is code that mostly works, so Claudio, I'm all for a new and improved
version of worm after it's been tested in pkgsrc. Does anyone else
concur?

-- 
Eric Radman  |  http://eradman.com