[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] CodingStyle: add typedefs chapter

    On Tue, 2 May 2006, David Woodhouse wrote:
    > On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 11:41 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > > The problem with uint32_t is that it's ugly, it used to be unportable, and
    > > you can't use it in header files _anyway_.
    > Unportable? It's at least as portable as u32 is, surely? We probably
    > wouldn't have used <stdint.h> in the kernel anyway -- we define them
    > ourselves.

    When the u<n> things were done, uint<n>_t wasn't at all common.

    > The header files are completely irrelevant too -- we're talking about
    > 'u32' not '__u32'.

    That's not irrelevant. Usually you want to have stuff in header files that
    you use in source code. You want the two to visually look similar. It's a
    hell of a lot less confusing to use "u32" (in source) and "__u32" (in the
    header file), than it is to mix "uint32_t" (in source) and some random
    other thing (in header file).

    > The important thing is your belief that it's ugly, which is what was
    > documented.

    And that wasn't what I objected to.

    What I objected to was that other part, which said that "uint32_t" was
    somehow more standard.


    And outside the kernel, that documentation is not exactly relevant.

    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: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.021 / U:7.744 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site