>Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 22:50:30 -0400 (EDT)
>From: der Mouse  <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
>
>>>> ...before including <arpa/inet.h>, you need <netinet/in.h>.
>>> any idea when the netinet/in.h dependency will be fixed?
>> "fixed"?  It's not a bug; it's been documented that way for years.
>
>Just because it's documented doesn't make it any less of a bug (or any
>more of a bug, for that matter).
>
>> Code that forgets <netinet/in.h> before <arpa/inet.h> will fail to
>> compile on a lot more than just NetBSD....
>
>So?  Its being widespread doesn't make it any less of a bug either.

This, folks, is what is commonly known as "an opinion."  Many others
disagree.

>My position is: every include file should be includeable on its own,
>independent of what may be necessary to use any particular facility
>that the file may provide (partial) support for.

So, just how much time does your system spend reading the same headers
over and over while rebuilding the world?  How much time would that
take on something like a VAX?  Multiple inclusion protection does not
keep cpp from reading the whole header each time it is #included.
-- 
Mike Long <mikel(at)shore.net>             http://www.shore.net/~mikel
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken