Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:15:51 +0100 | From | Richard Knutsson <> | Subject | Re: [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup |
| |
Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > I was not talking about name (I hate BITWRAP) but behavior. Oh, my bad :) > >> but mainly since it only enables wrapping of the long-type. > > I'd provde BIT and separate LLBIT for ones who really need long long. > People who intereseted in smaller than BITS_PER_LONG bitmaps shoud use > your proposal - BIT(x % DESIRED_WITH) and BIT should do modulo > BITS_PER_LONG internally. I agree that _if_ there is a "BITWRAP" then it should be long, but I don't see the reason for it to be in bitops.h when it is only input.h that uses it. + I find it different with BIT since it works as well with 'char' as 'long'. Also, I think it would be best if the name indicated it is a 'long'.
Am a little bit curious why you would like it in bitops.h, but won't complain if you do (think you have noticed my view of it ;))
Richard Knutsson
- 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/
| |