svn commit: r228878 - head/include

[Sean C. Farley]

On Sun, 25 Dec 2011, Ed Schouten wrote:

> Author: ed
> Date: Sun Dec 25 20:15:41 2011
> New Revision: 228878
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/228878
>
> Log:
>  Remove unneeded guard.
>
>  There is no reason why <stdbool.h> needs an include guard. It is already
>  protected by __bool_true_false_are_defined.
>
> Modified:
>  head/include/stdbool.h
>
> Modified: head/include/stdbool.h
> ==============================================================================
> --- head/include/stdbool.h	Sun Dec 25 18:15:31 2011	(r228877)
> +++ head/include/stdbool.h	Sun Dec 25 20:15:41 2011	(r228878)
> @@ -26,9 +26,6 @@
>  * $FreeBSD$
>  */
>
> -#ifndef _STDBOOL_H_
> -#define	_STDBOOL_H_
> -
> #ifndef __bool_true_false_are_defined
> #define	__bool_true_false_are_defined	1
>
> @@ -44,5 +41,3 @@ typedef	int	_Bool;
>
> #endif /* !__cplusplus */
> #endif /* __bool_true_false_are_defined */
> -
> -#endif /* !_STDBOOL_H_ */

I just thought of this while reviewing the change:  should 
__bool_true_false_are_defined be set only if __cplusplus is not set?  It 
should be set for C99, but I wonder if it should be set for C++.

Also, is there a style requirement that the guard for a header file be 
based off of the name of the file?  I did not see anything obvious for 
this within style(9), but I am curious.

Sean
-- 
scf at FreeBSD.org