Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Just would like to ask if you want patches for:
Total NACK to any of this boolean ididocy. I very much hope you didn't
get the impression you actually have a chance to get this merged.
* (Most importent, may introduce bugs if left alone)
Fixing boolean checking, ex:
if (bool == FALSE)
to
if (!bool)
this one of course makes sense, but please do it without introducing
any boolean type. Getting rid of all the TRUE/FALSE defines and converting
all scsi drivers to classic C integer as boolean semantics would be
very welcome janitorial work.
I don't get it. You object to the 'idiocy'
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/27/281), but find the x==FALSE -> !x
a good thing?
That is error-prone. Not "==FALSE" but what happens if x is (for some
reason) not 1 and then "if (x==TRUE)". There has been suggestions of doing:
if (x != FALSE)
or
if (!x == !TRUE)
but a simple "if (x)" is (in my opinion) the correct way.
Then that there is some objections booleans not being the "classical
C"-way, is another story.
Jan Engelhardt
Richard Knutsson
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
