Hi Tim,
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 23:45:19 +0200 (CEST) Tim Schmielau
<tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de> wrote:
>
> It seems to be quite common to assume that sched.h and all the other
> headers it drags in are available without declaration anyways. Since
> I aim at invalidating this assumption by removing all unneccessary
> includes, I have started to make dependencies on header files included
> by sched.h explicit.
> This is, again, just a small start, a patch covering the whole include/
> subtree would be approximately 25 times as large. However, before I'll
> dig into this further, I'd like to make sure I haven't missed some
> implicit rules about which headers might be assumed available, or should
> be included by the importing .c file, or something like that.
> So any comments about this project are welcome.
Let me encourage you! IMHO any source file (and here I include header
files) should include all the header files it depends on. This gives us
at least some chance of keeping the headers consistant with their usage.
-- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 07 2002 - 22:00:14 EST