sucker!
of course it should have been
enum {
one, two, three
};
best,
mishka
On 7/14/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mindless requirements are always with us. I once worked on a project
> where the word was passed on from on high that there would be no "magic"
> numbers in the code all such number would be defined in the header file
> for that translation unit with a meaningful name. Well for some numbers
> there was no meaningful name, they were just numbers. I wish I had
> thought of this, but another programmer on the project produced a header
> file and code that included this...
>
> somefile.h
>
> #define one 1
> #define two 2
> #define three 3
>
> somefile.c
>
> switch ( myNumber )
> {
> case one
> .
> case two
> .
> case three
> .
> }
>
> Doug Franklin wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 21:32:53 -0400, Mishka wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/winsock/socket.c#L2542
> >>
> >>
> >
> >That source code is a perfect example of what's wrong with WINE in my
> >opinion ... the comments tell you nothing about why it does what it
> >does and tell you a lot about what it's doing, which you could figure
> >out easily enough without any commentary whatsoever. I have to believe
> >that somewhere, someone has documentation that explains the division of
> >labor between the wine-preloader processes and the WINE implementations
> >of the Win32 API, and the wineserver process, and the rationale for
> >dividing things that way. I just haven't found it yet. And I suspect
> >it will just p*** me off when I find it. :-)
> >
> >TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> When you're worried or in doubt,
> Run in circles, (scream and shout).
>
>
