Re: [Qemu-devel] Headers without multiple inclusion guards

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 07:52:50PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 08:12:24PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> We have a bunch of headers without multiple inclusion guards.  Some are
> >> clearly intentional, some look accidental.  Too many for me to find out
> >> by examining each of them, so I'm asking their maintainers.
> >> 
> >> Why do I ask?  I'd like to mark the intentional ones and fix the
> >> accidental ones, so they don't flunk "make check-headers" from "[RFC v4
> >> 0/7] Baby steps towards saner headers" just because they lack multiple
> >> inclusion guards.
> >> 
> >> Just in case: what's a multiple inclusion guard?  It's
> >> 
> >>     #ifndef UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H
> >>     #define UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H
> >>     ...
> >>     #endif
> >> 
> >> with nothing but comments outside the conditional, so that the header
> >> can safely be included more than once.
> >
> > Any opinions on using the less verbose syntax instead:
> >
> >   #pragma once
> >
> > It is not portable C, but we explicitly only care about GCC or CLang,
> > so portability isn't an issue for us.
> 
> I doubt its worth the churn.  But I'm content to go with the flow here.

Since the collective response was effectively "Meh", lets just
pretend i didn't raise this suggestion :-)


Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|