xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] kill leftover WANT_FUNCS macro indirection

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kill leftover WANT_FUNCS macro indirection
From: David Chatterton <chatz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:17:06 +1000
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060731085454.A2280998@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
Organization: SGI
References: <44CAE247.6020608@sandeen.net> <p73k65w41je.fsf@verdi.suse.de> <44CBDFC9.3040202@sandeen.net> <20060731085454.A2280998@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
Reply-to: chatz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719)

Nathan Scott wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 05:23:05PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> This gets rid of some pointless macro defines... I had a version that
>>>> lower-cased it all too but Nathan liked this better, and he's the man!
>>>> :)
>>> Shouted function names is not exactly Linux code style at least.
>>>
>>> -Andi
>>>
>> well, *shrug* I have both versions, Nathan can take his pick :)
>>
>> honestly, one-liner static inlines isn't exactly linux code style either, 
>> tho 
>> the typechecking is nice.
>>
>> I guess I shouldn't have said "Nathan liked this better" - I think he was 
>> being 
>> pragmatic about the scope of the change.
> 
> Right, its more that we don't have a great track record at the moment
> of not introducing regressions with these cleanups (including myself),
> so I'm becoming more reluctant to do sweeping changes across the whole
> codebase.  Smaller, specific, and obviously-correct things are less 
> likely to introduce issues, so if we can achieve basically the same
> thing while churning the code less, I'm all for it.
> 

Sam on his previous project had to do significant cleanup/macro
changes and wrote some tools to help him do post-preprocessor
comparisons to really look at what had changed. I'm not sure how
generic these tools are, but worth considering.

David


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>