>>> Replace the specification of a data structure by a pointer dereference >>> as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the corresponding size >>> determination a bit safer. >> >> Isn't this pure matter of taste? >> Some developers prefer sizeof(*ptr) because it is easier to type, other >> developers prefer sizeof(struct foo) because you can determine the type >> at first sight and makes review more easy. > > sizeof(*ptr) is more future proof and normally more obvious and easier > to review. Is it interesting to see how different the software development opinions can be for such an implementation detail? > That said, I've tried to tell Markus to only send bugfix patches Can any deviations from the Linux coding style become "bugs" also in your view of the software situation? > because these are a waste of time How do you value compliance with coding styles? > and regularly introduce bugs. Really? Would you like to discuss concrete incidents any further? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
