Re: [9fans] Installing the updates

["Douglas A. Gwyn" <dagwyn@home.com>]

Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> > Many developers take the approach that each interface header should
> > be self-contained, so that the user of the header doesn't need to
> > know anything about the details of the implementation of that header.
> > Information hiding, you know.
> I think he's heard the argument but doesn't agree.
>         -- http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/pikestyle.html
> (The document is a sane view in a profession contorted by ridculous
> company coding standards that forbid short variable names and insist on
> `add 1 to the object's reference counter' comments.  Normally also the
> place where code reviews are a farce where everyone tries to detect a
> couple of spelling errors, even the same spelling errors as everyone
> else, so they can show they studied the code.)

I wasn't saying that *either* approach is always best,
just that there could be solid reasons why the standard
headers need to be idempotent as specified.

Making interface headers self-contained is hardly in
the same category as the "coding standards" you cite.