> Some prefer that source code be "templatized" regardless > of the number of exit points that any particular use of a > specific function type. This is another interesting view on involved implementation details. > Some of your patches are converting these templatized > functions to a different form for no added value. Would you like to distinguish a bit more between my evolving collection of update suggestions and the concrete proposal for the function "nicvf_register_interrupts"? > These patches make the local source code inconsistent > and generally goes against the authors preferred style. Which programming approach will be the leading one here finally? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
