![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Citerar Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>: > Michael Buesch wrote: > > On Friday 21 July 2006 16:23, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >>> The changes are: > >>> * u2 has been corrected to u1 (and also added it as __u1) > >> Do we really need this? Is not 'bool' enough? > > > > I would say we don't even _want_ this. > > A u1 variable will basically never be one bit wide. > > It will be at least 8bit, or let's say 32bit. Maybe > > even 64bit on some archs. It all depends on the compiler > > plus the arch. > > > > We _don't_ want u1, because we don't get what we see. > > For this and 1000 other reasons, we don't want u1. This is a classic "do what others have done (with some modifications) and not give a thought about it"... it's gone! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-07-22 00:19 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||