Re: EV_SET() better C++ compat with alternative implementations

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost>]

On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 04:59:41PM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> On 25/08/2019 16:48, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 04:43:51PM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> > > On 25/08/2019 15:39, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > There is no technical reason really for prefering void *
> > > Having to write code to exclusively deal with NetBSD's different API to
> > > compile without warnings sounds like a pretty good technical reason to me.
> > 
> > That's not a technical reason. It's a social reason.
> 
> And your reason for being anti-social is?

This whole discussion about breaking compatibility with NetBSD for the
sake of better compatibility with other systems. It's a weak argument
and as I said, there is no technical reason for why void * should be
preferred. Ultimately, from the perspective of the system interface, it
is an arbitrary value. If anything, it should be something like
uint64_t, but that is most definitely an ABI break for little gain.
What we do have now in the tree is a number of iterations on trying to
"improve" things that actually broke more than they fixed. Which is
exactly the reason why I asked about just going back to the known state
of being compatible with older NetBSD releases.

Joerg