Re: [PATCH v8 01/16] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 18:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > ({                                                                    \
> >         sizeof(val) <= 4 ? hash_32(val, bits) : hash_long(val, bits); \
> > })
> >
> > Is the better way to go. We are C programmers, we like to see the ?: on
> > a single line if possible. The way you have it, looks like three
> > statements run consecutively.
> 
> If we're C programmers, why use the non-standard statement-expression
> at all? And split it onto three lines when it's just a single one?

I like the blue color over the pink. Anyway, I was just expressing an
opinion and really didn't care if it was changed or not.


> 
> But whatever. This series has gotten way too much bike-shedding
> anyway. I think it should just be applied, since it does remove lines
> of code overall. I'd even possibly apply it to mainline, but it seems
> to be against linux-next.

I would think this change is a bit too big for an -rc4 release, but
you're the boss.  I've already given my ack for my code that this set
touches. Let it go to Stephen's repo then.

-- Steve


--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel


[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux