[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1153519892.44c15114aff09@portal.student.luth.se>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 00:11:32 +0200
From: ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Vadim Lobanov <vlobanov@...akeasy.net>,
Shorty Porty <getshorty_@...mail.com>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 2)
Citerar Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>:
> Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Friday 21 July 2006 16:23, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >>> The changes are:
> >>> * u2 has been corrected to u1 (and also added it as __u1)
> >> Do we really need this? Is not 'bool' enough?
> >
> > I would say we don't even _want_ this.
> > A u1 variable will basically never be one bit wide.
> > It will be at least 8bit, or let's say 32bit. Maybe
> > even 64bit on some archs. It all depends on the compiler
> > plus the arch.
> >
> > We _don't_ want u1, because we don't get what we see.
>
> For this and 1000 other reasons, we don't want u1.
This is a classic "do what others have done (with some modifications) and not
give a thought about it"... it's gone!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists