![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Vegard Nossum wrote: > Hi,>> On Nov 28, 2007 7:51 AM, Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se> wrote: > >> Vegard Nossum wrote:>> >>> +static int>>> >> Not 'static bool'?>> >>> +page_is_tracked(struct page *page)>>> >> Why not returning 'false' and 'true'?>> > > Sorry, I am not used to using bool in C :-) I will change this if bool > is preferred in kernel code. > > Well, why not use them since we have them (C99 standard and over a year in the kernel). ;) What is "preferred" in a group of a few thousands, is hard to say, but I believe it is the way to go. The only "resistance" to it I know, is "it is not a C idiom". A quite illogical statement, at best. However, the 0/1 vs false/true is just a preference. (I like false/true, since I also say "true AND false = false" for example... (NOT true = false, makes sense to me, NOT 1 = 0 seem strange, why can't it be 2, or -1 ;) )) >>> +static unsigned int>>> +opcode_get_size(const uint8_t *opcode)>>> >> Are we not using 'u8' in the kernel?>> >> Actually, I don't see any reason to use u8 when uint8_t is already > standard and used in other places in the kernel.> I believe I have heard they can be a problem in some situations. It also have the benefit of uniforming the kernel-code. cu 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: 2007-11-29 06:05 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||