Nathan Scott wrote:
On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 02:47:02PM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:
Just the notion: "your" guys was the ones to make those to boolean(_t),
Sort of, we actually inherited that type from IRIX where it is
defined in <sys/types.h>.
Oh, ok
"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?
Well, that would be named "flushcount" or some such thing. And you
would be able to tell that it was a counter by the way its used in
the surrounding code.
True, thinking more of when you have a quick look at the headers, but
"flushcount" would be a more logical name in such a case.
This discussion really isn't going anywhere useful; I think you need
to accept that not everyone sees value in a boolean type. :)
Well, can you blame me for trying? ;)
But the more important thing is to clean up the boolean-type and
FALSE/TRUE mess in the kernel.
cheers.
Thank you for your time and happy coding :)
|