From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Zippel Subject: Re: share/private/slave a subtree - define vs enum Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:59:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <1120851221.9655.17.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Bryan Henderson , Andrew Morton , bfields@fieldses.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxram@us.ibm.com, mike@waychison.com, Miklos Szeredi , Alexander Viro Return-path: Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:8117 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262825AbVGHUAB (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:00:01 -0400 To: Pekka Enberg In-Reply-To: <1120851221.9655.17.camel@localhost> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Hi, On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 21:11 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > > So it basically comes down to personal preference, if the original uses > > defines and it works fine, I don't really see a good enough reason to > > change it to enums, so please leave the decision to author. > > (And I don't see a good enough reason to use #defines when you don't > absolutely have to. This is what we disagree on.) "use" != "change". If an author already uses defines, that's fine and in most cases there is no reason to change it. > Roman, it is not as if I get to decide for the patch submitters. I > comment on any issues _I_ have with the patch and the authors fix > whatever they want (or what the maintainers ask for). The point of a review is to comment on things that _need_ fixing. Less experienced hackers take this a requirement for their drivers to be included. > P.S. Working code is not enough for the kernel. It must be maintainable > as well. defines are perfectly maintainable. bye, Roman