Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:43:55 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 14/15] bitops: Change the bitmap index from int to unsigned long [frv] |
| |
David Howells wrote: > H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > >>> But how does it break down between "static inline type\nfunction_name" and >>> "static inline\ntype function_name"? That's more to the point. >>> >> I believe that is the breakdown is roughly what you see above, i.e. over 8:1; >> the pattern I used was looking for "^static inline[^;(]*$", and a visual >> examination of the results shows that even if my line count is slighly off the >> lopsidedness is still dramatic. > > Sorry, I meant: > > "static inline type\nfunction_name" vs "static inline type function_name" >
Well, the latter is obviously in vast majority, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything at all here...
-hpa
| |