-On [20050111 06:32], Chris Pressey (cpressey@catseye.mine.nu) wrote:
>2. It seems GCC accepts
> int foo(__unused int arg)
> just as easily as
> int foo(int arg __unused)
> I've been using the first version, this patch uses the
> second version, and style(9) is silent on the issue.
> Does the DragonFly community have a preference?
Quick comment, not having checked the source in question.
But if you need to mark a function having an argument that is not used,
what's the point in having the argument present at all?
In my eyes that constitutes a design problem which you are now effectively
masking away.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! http://www.savetibet.org/ | http://ashemedai.deviantart.com/
http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/
Cum angelis et pueris, fideles inveniamur. Quis est iste Rex gloriae..?