On 12/2/22 13:51, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> I know - and originally the addition of unreclaimable was added later,
> but when I posted the RFC I felt there was some misunderstanding about
> what this data structure was and how it would be used because the
> addition of the unreclaimable bits came later. So I stuck both lists in
> one so it'd be a better view of what the data structure would look
> like.
You're not insane for thinking that.
But, it's really OK to introduce an abstraction that *looks* silly on
its face at first. You can easily just make up for it by saying:
struct silly_abstraction {
struct list_head list;
}
Oh, boy does my structure look silly. It's a structure with a
single list_head. Why oh why would I do something silly like
that? Well, for now, the code has but one list. Soon, I'll
add a whole smorgasbord of lists. Bear with me for now.
