netdev - Re: [PATCH] linux++, this: rename "struct notifier

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:28:08 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:     Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux++, this: rename "struct notifier_block *this"

On Friday 2020-06-19 09:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

>On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:06:45AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>> Rename
>> 	struct notifier_block *this
>> to
>> 	struct notifier_block *nb
>> 
>> "nb" is arguably a better name for notifier block.
>
>But not enough better to cause tons of pointless churn.  Feel free
>to use better naming in new code you write or do significant changes
>to, but stop these pointless renames.

Well, judging from the mention of "linux++" in the subject, I figure 
this is the old discussion of someone trying to make Linux code, or 
parts thereof, work in a C++ environment. Since the patch does not just 
touch headers but .c files, I deduce that there seems to be a project 
trying to build Linux, or a subset thereof, as a C++ program for the fun 
of it. UML could come to mind.

Is it a hot potato? Definitely. But so was IPv6 NAT, and now we have it 
anyway.