Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 09:10:31 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
       heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, olof@lixom.net, mingo@elte.hu,
       mpm@selenic.com
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] Introduce __WARN()
Message-ID: <20080106091031.420c355d@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
In-Reply-To: <4780FD48.4030505@student.ltu.se>
References: <20080105190713.73745ec6@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	<20080105190840.48a8c2c5@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	<4780BF38.3010902@student.ltu.se>
	<20080106074202.3c25b115@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	<4780FD48.4030505@student.ltu.se>
Organization: Intel
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1053
Lines: 28

On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:09:44 +0100
Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se> wrote:

> >> (btw, wouldn't 'var != 0' actually be the proper semantic instead
> >> of playing with '!'s?)
> >>     
> >
> > no because var could be a pointer for example...
> >   
> You mean because in that case it would be '!= NULL', do you? Sorry,
> do not see your point here.

my point is that you don't know which one to use.. 
But this isn't new discussion (nor something I'm changing at all); this has come
up since way back in 2005 :)
If you feel strongly of changing this, feel free to post a patch; for now I much
rather leave things as they are right now.


-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/