[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Patch(?): pci_device_id tables for linux-2.4.0-test11/drivers/block
Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 05:14:38PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > *This* is the over-engineering attitude I was talking about. The only
> > reason why you are preferring named initializers is because
> > pci_device_id MIGHT be changed. And if it is changed, it makes the
> > changeover just tad easier. For that, you ugly up the code and make it
> > more difficult to maintain.
> The other reason is that it makes self documenting code -- no need to look
> up the structure definition to make sense out of the code.

For the general case, that is true.

But note that the general case is usually a -single- structure being
initialized, not an array of structures. Unless the struct members
being initialized vary wildly from one array element to another, using
named initialized it redundant and -reduces- the ability of the
programmer to look at the pci_tbl[] and evaluate its contents at a

PCI tables do not use named initalizers on purpose. It was not an
accident or design mistake.


Jeff Garzik |
Building 1024 | The chief enemy of creativity is "good" sense
MandrakeSoft | -- Picasso
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:47    [W:0.046 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site