On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 11:40:34 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 11:15:16AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 13:50:59 -0300 > > Melissa Wen <melissa.srw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Remove idiom and use ternary operator for consistently trigger 0/1 value > > > on variable declaration. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Melissa Wen <melissa.srw@xxxxxxxxx> > > Hi Melissa, > > > > In general I would consider this unnecessary churn as, whilst > > it's no longer a favoured idiom, it is extremely common in the > > kernel. > > It's still my favourite... Why wouldn't people like it? It feels like > last week I just saw someone send a bunch of: > > - foo = (bar == baz) ? 1 : 0; > + foo = (bar == baz); > > patches and I thought it was an improvement at the time... That one is nice enough, it's the !! that Linus came out fairly strongly against though not sure I can find the particular email. That one is a fairly kernel specific idiom that I'll be honest I've rarely seen elsewhere ;) I remember wincing at the thread on this as it was an idiom I personally rather liked. In cases where it doesn't matter because foo doesn't need to 1 or 0 then what you have is nice and clean. I can't say it's one I care that much about, but I am happy if code that happens to be under cleanup anyway has this little bit made the 'preferred style'. There is something to said for consistency. Jonathan > > regards, > dan carpenter > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
