[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       inn-workers
Subject:    Re: another 2.5.1pre keywords-related coredump
From:       Russ Allbery <rra () stanford ! edu>
Date:       2009-10-10 3:28:49
Message-ID: 874oq8orke.fsf () windlord ! stanford ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com> writes:

> Incidentally, I do not understand why we have if (DO_KEYWORDS) and not
> #if DO_KEYWORDS; we have lots of useless boolean checks (if 0) for every
> header of every article...  Is there a reason not to use #if DO_KEYWORDS
> compilation checks?

Ideally, one wants to always do the if (DO_KEYWORDS) thing if possible
because it means that the compiler will syntax-check the code even if the
support isn't enabled, making it more likely it won't bitrot.  You can't
do this if you don't have available any optional functionality needed by
that code, though, of course.  The code will be optimized away by pretty
much any compiler.

Thanks, guys, for tracking this down.  I'm recovering from a really nasty
bout of gastroenteritis and have been really out of it.  :/

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
     <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.
_______________________________________________
inn-workers mailing list
inn-workers@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]