[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47811320.3040500@student.ltu.se>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:42:56 +0100
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, olof@...om.net, mingo@...e.hu,
mpm@...enic.com
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] Introduce __WARN()
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:09:44 +0100
> Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> wrote:
>
>
>>>> (btw, wouldn't 'var != 0' actually be the proper semantic instead
>>>> of playing with '!'s?)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> no because var could be a pointer for example...
>>>
>>>
>> You mean because in that case it would be '!= NULL', do you? Sorry,
>> do not see your point here.
>>
>
> my point is that you don't know which one to use..
>
Sorry to be a bother, but why is that relevant? Except semantics, they
are the same, right? So what problem would it be if you send it a
pointer? The '!' uses the same "argument/reason" when given a pointer ;).
> But this isn't new discussion (nor something I'm changing at all); this has come
> up since way back in 2005 :)
> If you feel strongly of changing this, feel free to post a patch; for now I much
> rather leave things as they are right now.
>
Oh o-well, in such case I may come back and do a larger patching
someday. Just though since you were in the neighborhood...
Have a good evening
Richard Knutsson
--
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