![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Citerar Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>: > Fun stuff to do in the future: > Convert test_bit() and various other test_*() and > atomic_*() operators to return bool. > Convert many TRUE/FALSE to true/false, in a patch of > similar size to Andrew's March 2006 patch entitled: > "[patch 1/1] consolidate TRUE and FALSE". > Convert a variety of spellings of BOOLEAN to "bool". > Convert routines and variables using the old C > convention of int/0/1 for boolean to the > new bool/false/true. > How do we detect breakage that results from converting > an apparent boolean to these values, when the > code actually worked by using more than just > values 0 and 1 for the variable in question? > How do we detect any breakage caused by possible changes > in the sizeof variables whose type we changed? > Various sparse and/or gcc checks that benefit from > knowing the additional constraints on bool types. Well... that's some work to be done :) Will save the list and try to mark it of along the road. > Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 /Richard Knutsson - 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: 2006-07-27 05:35 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||