lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] fastboot: Introduce an asynchronous function call mechanism
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:52:52 +0400 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 09:59:05AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 07:52:46 -0400 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 01:41:17 -0700
> > > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > > > +static int async_active = 0;
> > > >
> > > > ?
> > > ok will add comment
> >
> > I was actually "?"ing at the "= 0". I thought that would be obvious
> > but it's whizzed past two people so far :(
>
> Is there evidence that some gccs will not add such variable to .bss?

It does get placed in bss.

> Because "= 0;" is more readable.

Only to someone who doesn't know anything about C.

For the rest of us it is inconsistent, is a visual distraction and
wastes space which would be better taken up by a comment explaining the
variable's function (lol).



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-15 20:13    [W:0.052 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site