[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: strtonum(3) from OpenBSD?
Am 06.08.2009 um 23:31 schrieb Matt Thomas:
On Aug 6, 2009, at 7:49 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 10:48:39PM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
almost everything that has been brought up against having strtonum
libc is present in strsuftoll(x): it returns long long, it uses a
string for error reports, it does not support i18n etc.... So all
arguments gainst strtonum are somewhat void.
Um, no. As I said earlier, NetBSD's libc does not need to be the
of every mistake anyone has ever made in libc in any other Unix-like
It is unquestionably the case that there is bad code in NetBSD.
not in any way go to justify adding more bad code to NetBSD.
There has been nearly unanimous opposition from other developers to
this particular code to NetBSD's libc. I suggest that unless core,
the relevant technical management, say it's okay to add, it would
about the time to drop the subject, for now.
I concur whole-heartedly with everything Thor said. We are supposed
to learn from our mistakes, not repeat them. If this issues needs
to be decided by core, you can guess which way I'm deciding.
If you feel strongly about getting it added, speaking as a member of
core, you will need to ask for and receive core's blessing.
you missed to read my answer to Thor's mail before mailing me this, I
guess. if strtonum is consider a repetition of the strsuftoll
mistake, we could think of an API that resolves the mistake.
Main Index |
Thread Index |