struct dirent question

[Eric Anderson]

On 08/16/06 13:45, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 11:31 AM -0500 8/16/06, Eric Anderson wrote:
>> My point was, that either path you take (if BSD_VISIBLE is
>> defined or not), you end up with d_name having a size of
>> 255 + 1, so what's the point the having it at all?
> 
> To make it clear that d_name is tied to the exact value
> of MAXNAMLEN (just in case that value ever changes), and
> it does not just happen to be 255+1 bytes for some reason
> that is completely unrelated to MAXNAMLEN.
> 
> So if some programmer is working with the d_name variable,
> and *if* they actually look at this include file, then
> they'll immediately realize that any checks that they make
> should use MAXNAMLEN, and not hard-code in the 255 value.
> 
> That's my 2-cents worth, at least...
> 


Then shouldn't both be set to MAXNAMLEN?

Of course, it isn't a big deal, I'm just curious what I'm missing in the 
reasoning for doing such a thing.


Eric


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Anderson        Sr. Systems Administrator        Centaur Technology
Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------