Re: dpkg semi-hijack - an announcement (also, triggers)
On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 11:28:13AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>  Guillem persistently reintroducing errors, wholesale
> Here is an example of a big code change made by Guillem:
> However this is wrong as I explained here:
OK, you are correct here, but (char *) NULL would be clearer overall.
> I also emailed Guillem privately in August 2007 to ask that he stop
> this kind of thing.
> Guillem has persisted with exactly the same mistake. For example:
> It is one thing to make a coding mistake. Everyone makes mistakes.
> It is quite another to make a widespread change, without discussion,
> and which is even if it is correct and worthwhile only at best
> stylistically helpful. And then, after having been told that it was
> wrong, to continue requires a dogmatic belief in one's own
Here, either make sense in C99. NULL does give slightly more context
than 0 however, so there's nothing technically wrong with the change,
even if your preferred style is to use 0.
I seriously can't believe that you hijacked this over a disagreement
about the definition/usage of NULL. Include <stdlib.h> and be done
with it already--it's not like this is a pressing or difficult problem
that warranted this action!
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
`- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.