All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Milind Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>,
	kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:15:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45DF2F57.2080309@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d120d5000702230905r6b50a1bbm3b71551f855cdf01@mail.gmail.com>

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

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Milind Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>,
	kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:15:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45DF2F57.2080309@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d120d5000702230905r6b50a1bbm3b71551f855cdf01@mail.gmail.com>

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

  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-23 18:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <3b44d3fb0702222056k1d2a9b57q69a3555a09a9058e@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-23  8:14 ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:26   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:56   ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23  8:56     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 10:15     ` Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 10:27       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 14:10       ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:10         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:57         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 14:57           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 16:08           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 16:08             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 17:05             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 17:05               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:15               ` Richard Knutsson [this message]
2007-02-23 18:15                 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:37                 ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:37                   ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 19:11                   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 19:11                     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 21:58                     ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 21:58                       ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 22:43                       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 22:43                         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 11:11                         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 11:11                           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 12:59                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 12:59                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:39                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:39                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 19:11                           ` Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-24 19:23                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-25 15:45                             ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25 15:45                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:37                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:37                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 10:46   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 10:46     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=45DF2F57.2080309@student.ltu.se \
    --to=ricknu-0@student.ltu.se \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=milindchoudhary@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.