From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from az33egw01.freescale.net (az33egw01.freescale.net [192.88.158.102]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE3BDDE30 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2007 02:36:48 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:36:43 -0600 From: Scott Wood To: paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/19] bootwrapper: Rename p and pp to anchor and anchorptr. Message-ID: <20070313153643.GC3476@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> References: <20070312204150.GH28545@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <20070313021955.GK29506@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20070313021955.GK29506@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 01:19:55PM +1100, David Gibson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 02:41:50PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > > This makes the meaning of "p" clearer, and increases the visual > > difference between the two to avoid bugs such as the one fixed in > > "Modify *pp, not *p, in ft_shuffle()". > > Hrm. This does increase the visual difference, but honestly the > meaning of "anchor" is not notably more obvious to me than "p". The idea was that it's where the caller holds on to when the data gets moved around. I agree that it's not a great name, but I couldn't think of anything better (and previously, someone requested that I change the name from p). Any suggestions? -Scott