Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jun 2013 15:36:47 -0400 | From | Jörn Engel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del |
| |
On Mon, 3 June 2013 13:49:30 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I can't say I like the structure. > > A list_pop that removes and entry from the head or returns NULL if the > list is empty would lead to nice while loops that are obviously > readable instead.
Something like this?
#define list_pop(head) \ ({ struct list_head *____pos; \ list_empty(head) ? NULL : (____pos = (head)->next, \ list_del(____pos), ____pos) \ })
#define list_pop_entry(head, type, member) \ ({ struct list_head *____pos; \ list_empty(head) ? NULL : (____pos = (head)->next, \ list_del(____pos), list_entry(____pos, type, member) \ })
Would be fine with me as well.
Jörn
-- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, but not tried it. -- Donald Knuth -- 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/
| |