Re: [9fans] Go and 21-bit runes (and a bit of Go status)

[lucio@proxima.alt.za]

> And for the libbio changes, I’m more opposed to the four functions
> Bgetle2, Bgetle4, Bputle2, and Bputle4 and the odd use of the
> BPUTC && BPUTLE4 macros.  Those implementations are found in other
> portions of the code, not specific to libbio, and seem to be
> grafted on in a slightly off manner.  That said, I’ll gladly
> change my mind if the p9p, Inferno, and a few other forks of the
> libbio source give it their blessing.  To date, none have chimed
> in to contribute to the conversation in any way so I’m more than
> happy to use a patch in Go to still use Plan 9’s libbio but pull
> in the four new functions and the macros and go from there.

I'd like to hear more from you about the (mis)use of Bgetle* and
friends (not the macros, we all agree on these).  I think we ought to
prepare a submission to Bell Labs for a reasoned inclusion of these
functions in the library (and the corresponding B*be ones, which for
some reason Go does not need (?!)).  As for the macros, I know Russ
was never in favour of using them, we may have a case to have them
rescinded :-) I suspect that they would all have been dropped, if Russ
had known where to look for them.  If memory serves, he reverted a CL,
but not all pertinent CLs, possibly on request from (members of) the
Plan 9 faction.

++L