[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080102203735.GB15099@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:37:35 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: WARNING: do not add new typedefs - is that for real?
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 02:18:27PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> > But yes, this is one of the rare cases where a typedef makes sense,
> > but ???'d call it osd_off_t or something like that.
> >
>
> You mean osd_cdb_offset_t. I thought of dropping that _t, I hate it,
> just a personal preference.
No, I mean osd_off_t :) off vs offset is purely cosmetic, but in Linux
we have a strong preference for short typenames. Just look how ugly
the prototype and struct defintion in your original posting look :)
Also I thing the _cdb is superflous because there is no other offset
type in the OSD spec.
--
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