Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:54:19 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Coding style RFC: convert "for (i=0;i<ARRAY_SIZE(array);i++)" to "array_for_each(index, array)" |
| |
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 18:42 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Joe Perches wrote: > > [...] > >>>perhaps: >>> >>>#define array_for_each(element, array) \ >>> for ((element) = (array); \ >>> (element) < ((array) + ARRAY_SIZE((array))); \ >>> (element)++) >> >>If you're going for consistency, then shouldn't this be >>array_for_each_entry()? > > > That depends on the decision between consistency to array_for_each_index > or consistency to list_for_each.
I don't follow.
list_for_each gives you a list_head. list_for_each_entry gives you a pointer to an entry in the list, which is equivalent to the above loop which gives a pointer to an entry in the array. Accordingly, it should be called array_for_each_entry. What sort of logic leads to another conclusion?
array_for_each_index gives an index into the array.
I offer no opinion on the merit of such macros, just their names.
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
| |