Re: camcontrol WARNS6: take 5

[Chris Pressey <cpressey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:57:30 +0100
Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai@xxxxxx> wrote:

> -On [20050111 06:32], Chris Pressey (cpressey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) 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?

They're usually functions that must conform to some function type. 
Often they're signal handlers; these ones happen to be callbacks.

-Chris

> 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..?
>