From: Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Chanwoo Lee <cw9316.lee@samsung.com>,
stanley.chu@mediatek.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: ufs-mediatek: Modify the return value
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 09:29:20 +1100 (AEDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e713ae2-d328-5e2f-a88c-032b6b0a0b17@linux-m68k.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5379c0ec-8dd3-f1bf-0a08-a621c68a3b6d@acm.org>
On Fri, 18 Nov 2022, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/18/22 13:34, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2022, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >
> >> There is more Linux kernel code that [...] than code that [...].
> >
> > Thus mediocrity prevails.
>
> Mediocrity? I don't understand the above comment.
I'm afraid it was poorly expressed.
> Personally I prefer the style without !! and I don't think that it's a
> mediocre style.
>
My comment goes to the rationale you gave not the decision you made.
Regarding the decision, it's a choice between "explicit is better than
implicit" and "brevity is better than redundancy". The patch opted for the
former, you opted for the latter. I also have an opinion, but I'm not the
maintainer so I'll keep it to myself.
Regarding the rationale, a maintainer who merely follows the majority is
not actually doing code review. This will lead to mediocrity.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-18 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20221118045326epcas1p408c9e16a58201043c9eb3c99110fab0c@epcas1p4.samsung.com>
2022-11-18 4:52 ` [PATCH] scsi: ufs: ufs-mediatek: Modify the return value Chanwoo Lee
2022-11-18 5:42 ` Stanley Chu
2022-11-18 10:39 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-11-18 17:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-11-18 21:34 ` Finn Thain
2022-11-18 21:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-11-18 22:29 ` Finn Thain [this message]
2022-11-26 2:11 ` Martin K. Petersen
2022-12-01 3:45 ` Martin K. Petersen
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=2e713ae2-d328-5e2f-a88c-032b6b0a0b17@linux-m68k.org \
--to=fthain@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=cw9316.lee@samsung.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.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