[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Synchronizing Bit operations V2
    On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, David Mosberger-Tang wrote:

    > I have to agree with Hans and I'd much prefer making the mode part of
    > the operation's
    > name and not a parameter. Besides being The Right Thing, it saves a
    > lot of typing.

    IMHO It reduces the flexibility of the scheme and makes it not extendable.
    Leads to a large quantity of macros that are difficult to manage.

    Also some higher level functions may want to have the mode passed to them
    as parameters. See f.e. include/linux/buffer_head.h. Without the
    parameters you will have to maintain farms of definitions for all cases.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-03-31 02:52    [W:0.019 / U:18.528 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site