On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 10:46:49AM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:40:19 +0200 Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:43:37PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: ...
> > > > Additionally, the "default n" is pointless and should be removed.
> > >
> > > I expect the _extra_ features are useless for normal users.
> > > Your reasoning or feeling?
> > >...
> >
> > That's not my point, my point is that if you remove the "default n"
> > line, nothing changes. The default is still "n", but it's better
> > readable.
>
> Why is it more readable without the "default n" line?
> One could say that supplying the default "default n" line is clearer
> than having it omitted.
The majority of options defaults to "n".
It's easier to spot a non-"n" default if this means an additional line
instead of only one changed letter.
> ~Randy
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
