From: David Chatterton <chatz@melbourne.sgi.com>
To: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kill leftover WANT_FUNCS macro indirection
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:17:06 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44CD3DF2.1010108@melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060731085454.A2280998@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
Nathan Scott wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 05:23:05PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> This gets rid of some pointless macro defines... I had a version that
>>>> lower-cased it all too but Nathan liked this better, and he's the man!
>>>> :)
>>> Shouted function names is not exactly Linux code style at least.
>>>
>>> -Andi
>>>
>> well, *shrug* I have both versions, Nathan can take his pick :)
>>
>> honestly, one-liner static inlines isn't exactly linux code style either, tho
>> the typechecking is nice.
>>
>> I guess I shouldn't have said "Nathan liked this better" - I think he was being
>> pragmatic about the scope of the change.
>
> Right, its more that we don't have a great track record at the moment
> of not introducing regressions with these cleanups (including myself),
> so I'm becoming more reluctant to do sweeping changes across the whole
> codebase. Smaller, specific, and obviously-correct things are less
> likely to introduce issues, so if we can achieve basically the same
> thing while churning the code less, I'm all for it.
>
Sam on his previous project had to do significant cleanup/macro
changes and wrote some tools to help him do post-preprocessor
comparisons to really look at what had changed. I'm not sure how
generic these tools are, but worth considering.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-31 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-29 4:21 [PATCH] kill leftover WANT_FUNCS macro indirection Eric Sandeen
2006-07-29 20:08 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-29 22:23 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-07-30 22:54 ` Nathan Scott
2006-07-30 23:17 ` David Chatterton [this message]
2006-07-31 0:54 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-06 9:45 ` Martin Steigerwald
2006-09-20 4:14 ` linux-xfs
2006-09-20 11:41 ` David Chatterton
2006-09-20 13:33 ` Eric Sandeen
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=44CD3DF2.1010108@melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=chatz@melbourne.sgi.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=nathans@sgi.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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