[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090112.215320.197154233.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:53:20 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: bhutchings@...arflare.com
Cc: lizf@...fujitsu.com, qhfeng.kernel@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: fix wrong English expression in comments
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:39:18 +0000
> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:05 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> > > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ struct inet_bind_bucket;
> > > struct inet_timewait_sock {
> > > /*
> > > * Now struct sock also uses sock_common, so please just
> > > - * don't add nothing before this first member (__tw_common) --acme
> > > + * don't add anything before this first member (__tw_common) --acme
> >
> > They are the same meaning...
>
> A double-negative can be an informal way of reinforcing a negative, but
> can sometimes mean the positive. So this change would remove a minor
> ambiguity. However I think it should be clear that it is not compulsory
> to add new members to the structure. ;-)
After all of this discussion, I think I'm going to keep this comment
as-is. :-)
--
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