Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Converting into generic boolean

[Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>]

Nathan Scott wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 12:24:41PM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:
>  
>
> > Nathan Scott wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > Hmm, so your bool is better than the next guys bool[ean[_t]]? :)
> > >      
> > Well yes, because it is not "mine". ;)
> > It is, after all, just a typedef of the C99 _Bool-type.
> >    
>
> Hmm, one is really no better than the other IMO.
>  
IMO the _Bool is better because that lets the compiler do its magic.

> > > I took the earlier patch and completed it, switching over to int
> > > use in place of boolean_t in the few places it used - I'll merge
> > > that at some point, when its had enough testing.
> > >
> > >      
> > Is that set in stone? Or is there a chance to (in my opinion) improve 
> > the readability, by setting the variables to their real type.
> >    
>
> Nothings completely "set in stone" ... anyone can (and does) offer
> their own opinion.  The opinion of people who a/ read and write XFS
> code alot and b/ test their changes, is alot more interesting than
> the opinion of those who don't, however.
>  
Of course! :) No critisism intended.

Just the notion: "your" guys was the ones to make those to boolean(_t), 
and now you seem to want to patch them away because I tried to make them 
more general.

> In reality, from an XFS point of view, there are so few uses of the
> local boolean_t and so little value from it, that it really is just
> not worth getting involved in the pending bool code churn IMO (I see
> 72 definitions of TRUE and FALSE in a recent mainline tree, so you
> have your work cut out for you...).
>  
So, is the:
B_FALSE -> false
B_TRUE -> true
ok by you?

> "int needflush;" is just as readable (some would argue moreso) as
> "bool needflush;" and thats pretty much the level of use in XFS -
>  
How are you sure "needflush" is, for example, not a counter?

> and we're using the "int" form in so many other places anyway...
> but, I'll see what the rest of the XFS folks think and take it from
> there.
>  
Ok

> cheers.
>  
cu

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/