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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 09:14:08 +1000 From: Nathan Scott <nathans@....com> To: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> Cc: akpm@...l.org, xfs@....sgi.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Converting into generic boolean On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 02:47:02PM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > Just the notion: "your" guys was the ones to make those to boolean(_t), Sort of, we actually inherited that type from IRIX where it is defined in <sys/types.h>. > and now you seem to want to patch them away because I tried to make them > more general. Nah, I just don't see the value either way, and see it as another code churn exercise. > So, is the: > B_FALSE -> false > B_TRUE -> true > ok by you? Personally, no. Thats code churn with no value IMO. > >"int needflush;" is just as readable (some would argue moreso) as > >"bool needflush;" and thats pretty much the level of use in XFS - > > > How are you sure "needflush" is, for example, not a counter? Well, that would be named "flushcount" or some such thing. And you would be able to tell that it was a counter by the way its used in the surrounding code. This discussion really isn't going anywhere useful; I think you need to accept that not everyone sees value in a boolean type. :) cheers. -- Nathan - 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