In article <200012101911.OAA14527@dragon.tools.gtei.net>,
 <jchacon@genuity.net> wrote:

>This sounds good as far as the clean code perspective comes into play.
>
>Any idea how much code will barf by adding the new options in?

Probably a lot. I started cleaning up libc, and I stopped to get some
opinions after I committed fixes to ~10 files. 

>I've been bitten in the past on systems with missing declarations so that's
>definitly something we should be catching. 
>
>Aren't redudant decls required in cases where some standards say you must
>be able to only include X.h and it won't have any side effects through
>include/reincluding other headers? i.e. the mutual independece part of the 
>ANSI C spec for instance.

Yes, but we don't need to declare things twice. As I mentioned in my message
we can avoid duplicate declarations by using cpp variables.

christos