From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@nokia.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] mm: make read-only accessors take const pointer parameters
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:44:25 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1303299865.2700.25.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <op.vt8hr5j73l0zgt@mnazarewicz-glaptop>
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 13:20 +0200, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:28:37 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I think it is good when small core functions like this are strict and
> > use 'const' whenever possible, even though 'const' is so imperfect in C.
> >
> > Let me give an example from my own experience. I was writing code which
> > was using the kernel RB trees, and I was trying to be strict and use
> > 'const' whenever possible. But because the core functions like 'rb_next'
> > do not have 'const' modifier, I could not use const in many many places
> > of my code, because gcc was yelling. And I was not very enthusiastic to
> > touch the RB-tree code that time.
>
> The problem is that you end up with two sets of functions (one taking const
> another taking non-const), a bunch of macros or a function that takes const
> but returns non-const. If we settle on anything I would probably vote for
> the last option but the all are far from ideal.
I think it is fine to take const and return non-const. Yes, it is not
beautiful, but we could live with this.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (D?N?N?N?D 1/4 D?D,N?N?N?DoD,D1)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-20 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-15 9:56 [PATCH 0/1] mm: make read-only accessors take const pointer parameters Phil Carmody
2011-04-15 9:56 ` [PATCH] mm: make read-only accessors take const parameters Phil Carmody
2011-04-15 14:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-15 16:07 ` Phil Carmody
2011-04-20 11:45 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2011-04-16 23:48 ` David Rientjes
2011-04-15 14:51 ` [PATCH 0/1] mm: make read-only accessors take const pointer parameters Andrea Arcangeli
2011-04-15 15:59 ` Phil Carmody
2011-04-15 16:09 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-04-20 9:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2011-04-20 11:20 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2011-04-20 11:44 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2011-04-15 16:12 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2011-04-15 16:28 ` Phil Carmody
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=1303299865.2700.25.camel@localhost \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ext-phil.2.carmody@nokia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mina86@mina86.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).