Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751354AbWIDKSB (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Sep 2006 06:18:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751353AbWIDKSB (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Sep 2006 06:18:01 -0400 Received: from gepetto.dc.ltu.se ([130.240.42.40]:63676 "EHLO gepetto.dc.ltu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751352AbWIDKSA (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Sep 2006 06:18:00 -0400 Message-ID: <44FBFEE9.4010201@student.ltu.se> Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 12:24:41 +0200 From: Richard Knutsson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nathan Scott CC: akpm@osdl.org, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Converting into generic boolean References: <44F833C9.1000208@student.ltu.se> <20060904150241.I3335706@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060904150241.I3335706@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1724 Lines: 58 Nathan Scott wrote: >On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 03:21:13PM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > > >>From: Richard Knutsson >> >>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/