[ldns-users] Missing or incorrect prototypes

[Dag-Erling Smørgrav]

Willem Toorop <willem at nlnetlabs.nl> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at des.no> writes:
> > It still needs a prototype:
> This helper function is not intended for use by the public.  It has no
> place in the public API.

Then provide a prototype in a separate header which is only used
internally.

> > BTW, including argument names in prototypes is a bad habit - it
> > pollutes the application namespace.
> Who says so?

The C standard.

C doesn't have as many distinct name spaces as you'd like, so using a
particular identifier as an argument name in a header file restricts
what a source file that includes that header file can use that
identifier for.  This is why people do stupid things like:

foo.c: int foo(int a, int b) { /* ... */ }
foo.h: int foo(int _a, int _b);

so foo.h won't "steal" a and b from the application, but this just
replaces one error with another (_a and _b are in a namespace which is
reserved for the implementation).  It is better to just leave out the
name entirely.

> It has documentational value. It indicates the meaning of what is
> expected.

1) You already have comments documenting the arguments.

2) Your users shouldn't have to refer to the headers anyway.  That's
   what man pages are for.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no