From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266310AbUBJS6L (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:58:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266317AbUBJS6K (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:58:10 -0500 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:59401 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266310AbUBJS6I (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:58:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:57:55 +0100 (CET) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Andreas Fester cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Randy.Dunlap" Subject: Re: [2.6 PATCH] persist qconf options In-Reply-To: <4028895C.4010101@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <4028075E.1070809@gmx.de> <4028895C.4010101@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Andreas Fester wrote: > > All these access functions are really not neccessary. > > Well, I think in the sense of an Object Oriented interface > with getter/setter methods they probably *do* make sense ... They have the tendency to bloat the source and I try to keep it small. > > Bonus points if you also save the list mode and the position of the > > splitter. :) > > Lets see if I can win them :-) Great, I'm looking forward to it. Thanks. bye, Roman