Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 04 Sep 2006 12:24:41 +0200 | From | Richard Knutsson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Converting into generic boolean |
| |
Nathan Scott wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 03:21:13PM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > > >>From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se> >> >>Converting: >>'B_FALSE' into 'false' >>'B_TRUE' into 'true' >>'boolean_t' into 'bool' >> >> > >Hmm, so your bool is better than the next guys bool[ean[_t]]? :) > > Well yes, because it is not "mine". ;) It is, after all, just a typedef of the C99 _Bool-type.
>Seems like it'll be a few more days until the next cleanup patch >to remove _that_, so we shouldn't go that path. > A generic boolean to an integer? And if Andrew toss that patch, this one will follow. So what is wrong with this path?
> Since we do use >the current boolean_t somewhat inconsistently in XFS, I'd say we >should just toss the thing and use int. > > If _that_ is the problem, I am happy to help. Did not want to touch more then the already defined "booleans", because it seemed to scare some people. After all, what interest me next most to a generic boolean, is using booleans when it obviously is a boolean.
>I took the earlier patch and completed it, switching over to int >use in place of boolean_t in the few places it used - I'll merge >that at some point, when its had enough testing. > > Is that set in stone? Or is there a chance to (in my opinion) improve the readability, by setting the variables to their real type.
>cheers. > > best regards
-- VGER BF report: H 0.117186 - 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/
| |