Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!phigate!prle!prles2!cstw01!meulenbr
From: meulenbr@cstw01.prl.philips.nl (Frans Meulenbroeks)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Future of Minix
Message-ID: <573@prles2.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jul 89 14:41:30 GMT
Sender: nobody@prles2.UUCP
Reply-To: meulenbr@cstw01.prl.philips.nl (Frans Meulenbroeks)
Organization: Centre for Software Technology, Philips Eindhoven
Lines: 24
References:

Some things which might be considered for the next release of Minix:
1 splitting the lib and commands directories.
  These are currently quite huge, causing ls to fail after a make in
  these directories
2 declare all local subroutines forward in the various files
3 create an include file for kernel, mm, fs which contains all
  global subroutines. This file should be included by every module.
4 explicitly type all subroutines
5 Use function prototypes in all forward declarations.
  Since ack does not support these yet they could be embedded in a macro
  e.g.:
	#define ARG(x)	
	extern int f(ARG(int, char *))
  This eases the migration of the code to compilers which do support
  ANSI function prototypes (they can define ARG(x) to x), and also gives
  the reader a better overview of what's going on.

What does the net in general, and ast in particular, think about this?

PS: a lot of effor for 2-5 has already been done.

Frans Meulenbroeks        (meulenbr@cst.prl.philips.nl)
	Centre for Software Technology
	( or try: ...!mcvax!phigate!prle!cst!meulenbr)