> Quite frankly, I don't quite understand where you get those enormous balls
> you have, that you can then talk about how ugly it is to just add a "= 0"
> that shuts up a compiler warning. That's the _least_ ugly part of the
> whole damn function!
The clanking when I walk annoys people in the office too...
But you're right. It is stupid of me to make such a big deal about
this. My excuse is that I've seen those warnings so many times and
actually given them more thought than they deserve, and I really felt
that Jeff's change makes the admittedly already ugly code a tiny
little bit worse.
> Anyway, here's a totally untested cleanup that compiles but probably
> doesn't work, because I didn't check that I did the right thing with all
> the pointer arithmetic (ie when I change "wqe" to a real structure pointer
> instead of just a "void *", maybe I left some pointer arithmetic around
> that expected it to work as a byte pointer, but now really works on the
> whole structure size instead).
Given that you took the time to do this, I'll get the patch into a
working state and apply it. And maybe split it into reviewable chunks
while I'm at it ;)
Thanks,
Roland
-
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]
