From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pekka Enberg Subject: Re: share/private/slave a subtree Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 19:17:47 +0300 Message-ID: <1120839467.18988.4.camel@localhost> References: <1120816072.30164.10.camel@localhost> <1120816229.30164.13.camel@localhost> <1120817463.30164.43.camel@localhost> <84144f0205070804171d7c9726@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ram , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , mike@waychison.com, bfields@fieldses.org, Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1]:32413 "EHLO mail.cs.helsinki.fi") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262698AbVGHQS0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2005 12:18:26 -0400 To: Roman Zippel In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 15:34 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > Are the advantages big enough to actively discourage defines? It's nice > that you do reviews, but please leave some room for personal preferences. > If the code is correct and perfectly readable, it doesn't matter whether > to use defines or enums. Unless you also intent to also debug and work > with that code, why don't leave the decision to the author? I think the advantages are big enough. Also, in my experience, it is usually not a conscious decision by the author. But if you and other developers think my enum pushing is too much, I can tone it down :). Pekka