linux-kernel - Re: Conversion to generic boolean

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0608281255100.14305@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:58:13 +0200 (MEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:	Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>,
	James.Bottomley@...elEye.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Conversion to generic boolean


>> Just would like to ask if you want patches for:
>
>Total NACK to any of this boolean ididocy.  I very much hope you didn't
>get the impression you actually have a chance to get this merged.
>
>> * (Most importent, may introduce bugs if left alone)
>> Fixing boolean checking, ex:
>> if (bool == FALSE)
>> to
>> if (!bool)
>
>this one of course makes sense, but please do it without introducing
>any boolean type.  Getting rid of all the TRUE/FALSE defines and converting
>all scsi drivers to classic C integer as boolean semantics would be
>very welcome janitorial work.

I don't get it. You object to the 'idiocy' 
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/27/281), but find the x==FALSE -> !x 
a good thing?


Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
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/