On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 22:42 +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:
> Just why is it, that when there is a change to make locally defined
> booleans into a more generic one, it is converted into integers? ;)
I just see this as an opportunity to make jfs more closely fit the
coding style of the mainline kernel.
> But seriously, what is gained by removing them, other then less
> understandable code? (Not talking about FALSE -> 0, but boolean_t -> int)
I don't feel strongly one way or another about the use of boolean_t, but
under fs/, the only code that uses that type is in fs/jfs and fs/xfs,
which are both ported from other operating systems. Using ints for
boolean values does seem to be the accepted practice in the kernel.
> I can understand if authors disprove making an integer into a boolean,
> but here it already were booleans.
> But hey, you are the maintainer ;)
I could be persuaded to leave the declarations as boolean_t or even
making them bool, but right now I'm leaning toward making them int for
consistency.
Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
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]
