Re: [PATCH] UUID support for UFS

["Javier Martín" <lordhabbit@gmail.com>]

Pavel Roskin escribió:
> On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 22:14 +0200, Javier Martín wrote:
> 
>>> But I would prefer that we work on fixing bugs rather than non-bugs.
>>>
>> "Fixing" this would allow us to have cleaner code, and separate "casual 
>> variables" from fixed-length variables. If we print int with %d and 
>> int32_t with PRId32, the impact of the subtle bugs that appear when we 
>> port across architectures will be reduced.
> 
> If int and int32_t are different types, gcc will warn about it, at least
> for implicit conversion with data loss.
Oh, yes... with the current build system and without -Werror, warnings 
are _very_ visible. </sarcasm> Besides, do we really have -Wconversion 
enabled? I don't know, but gcc tends to be quite silent when it comes to 
type conversion, mainly due to the laxitude it's used in *nix C 
programs. The cast in that code was all but implicit, and explicit casts 
tend to shut the compiler up.

> 
> It's more likely that bugs will be introduced by that change, not fixed.
> Besides, the code will be harder to read.
You say it'd be harder to read because the macros are newly-introduced 
(C99) and thus not widely know. However, they are pretty clear and 
self-explanatory once you google them the first time... and at the very 
least they call attention to themselves: an unknowing programmer would 
wonder what they are. Using a "normal" print specifier and a type cast 
does not.