Re: [PATCH] proc: Use str_yes_no() helper in proc_pid_ksm_stat()

[Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>]

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:11:08PM +0100, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> /*
>  * Here provide a series of helpers in the str_$TRUE_$FALSE format (you can
>  * also expand some helpers as needed), where $TRUE and $FALSE are their
>  * corresponding literal strings. These helpers can be used in the printing
>  * and also in other places where constant strings are required. Using these
>  * helpers offers the following benefits:
>  *  1) Reducing the hardcoding of strings, which makes the code more elegant
>  *     through these simple literal-meaning helpers.
>  *  2) Unifying the output, which prevents the same string from being printed
>  *     in various forms, such as enable/disable, enabled/disabled, en/dis.
>  *  3) Deduping by the linker, which results in a smaller binary file.
>  */

Printf modifiers would've covered all of that, though...

The thing is, <expr> ? "yes" : "no" is visually easier to distinguish than
str_yes_no(<expr>), especially when expression itself is a function call, etc.
So I'd question elegance, actually...