[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d6ec4e54-1ec9-648a-ce8c-1e08a439c3c6@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 09:46:22 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
Cc: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@....com>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v3 3/3] nvme: introduce
nvmet_target_{setup/cleanup} common code
On 8/25/23 07:26, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 06:45:25AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> I don't like the "new style". What is so hard about typing "$@" to pass all function
>> arguments to _nvmet_target_setup()? Leaving out "$@" makes it much harder than
>> necessary to figure out the intent of the code author - not passing any arguments
>> or passing all caller arguments implicitly.
>
> Because "$@" is just not correct.
Why not?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists