Re: 2.4.9 does not compile [PATCH]

Roman Zippel
2001-08-17T01:37:43Z

Hi,

"David S. Miller" wrote:

> IMHO, it would have been more elegant to use the typeof construct provided
> by gcc in the new macro instead of introducing a type parameter like this...
>
> The whole point was to make users explicitly state the type so they
> would have to think about it.

I have two problems with this:
1. They maybe think once about it, but are they doing it a second time?
If the type of the argument is changed somewhere in the header, the min
argument is easily missed, since...
2. This macro doesn't produce a warning like the typeof version does.
The typeof version warns you about signed/unsigned compares, while an
assignment gives no warning.

bye, Roman