Re: [PATCH] style(5): No struct typedefs

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>]

> On Jul 11, 2023, at 2:56 PM, Taylor R Campbell <campbell+netbsd-tech-kern%mumble.net@localhost> wrote:
> 
> I agree the keyword is ugly, and it's unfortunate that in order to
> omit it we would have to use C++, but the ugliness gives us practical
> benefits of better type-checking, reduced header file maintenance
> burden, and reduced motivation for unnecessary header file
> dependencies.

No -- you just don't have to use "void *".  Can you point to a practical problematic example?

-- thorpej