lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:33:33 -0700
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:

> >> I was thinking good-list / bad-list.
> >>
> >> /me that has been doing a lot of git bisect lately...
> >
> > I think it depends on the context. I'd prefer a grammatically awkward verb that described
> > the action more specifically, than a grammatically nicer generic term. In other words,
> > yes/no, good/bad don't mean that much to me, unless it's obvious from context
> > what the effect will be. With something like allow/deny, I have a pretty clear mental
> > model of what the code is going to do.
>
> That matches what I was about to say:
> Just using yes/no does not tell someone what they are saying yes or no about.
> It should be more descriptive, like allow/block.

After doing two days worth of git bisect, good/bad is hardcoded in my head :-p

-- Steve

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-07 17:42    [W:0.096 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site