From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754091AbYITNFk (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:05:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751805AbYITNFc (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:05:32 -0400 Received: from 2-1-3-15a.ens.sth.bostream.se ([82.182.31.214]:50062 "EHLO zoo.weinigel.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751545AbYITNFb (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:05:31 -0400 Message-ID: <48D4F519.2080509@weinigel.se> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:05:29 +0200 From: Christer Weinigel User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dobriyan CC: Russ Dill , Eric Miao , Cyrill Gorcunov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, Ben Dooks , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kernel.h: add ARRAY_AND_SIZE() macro to complement ARRAY_SIZE(). References: <20080918132447.516309749@fluff.org.uk> <20080918150624.GA3421@x200.localdomain> <20080919065426.GA7222@lenovo> <20080919175544.GA3228@x200.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20080919175544.GA3228@x200.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 08:28:45AM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: >> My vote is for ARRAY_AND_SIZE to spread far and wide across the land. >> ARRAY_SIZE is already very safe, as it has a __must_be_array macro >> built in. So ARRAY_AND_SIZE is even safer, as it prevents you from >> mixing up two different arrays. It also reduces line length and makes >> driver and device (usually platform_device) registration code easier >> to read. > > It also spreads ARRAY_SIZE misnaming futher. You still haven't explained what's misnamed about it, nor suggested a better name. > It introduces one more core macro and quite pointless one. I can't > personally recall a single bug where sizeof() was taken from another > array. You haven't written a lot of machine definitions then. When adding platform devices for an embedded platform one has to write a lot of boilerplate like this: platform_add_devices(n30_devices, ARRAY_SIZE(n30_devices)); and it is much too easy to copy paste that line and miss one of the references. > It creates interesting confusion point: ARRAY_AND_SIZE is about array > and it's size. What ARRAY_SIZE is about then? ARRAY_AND_SIZE -> (An) array and (its) size ARRAY_SIZE -> (The) array size Sure, you could write ARRAY_AND_ITS_SIZE, but would that really make anyone happy? Cobol went out of fashion a long time ago. /Christer