Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Jan 2002 15:52:17 +0100 | From | "J.A. Magallon" <> | Subject | Re: [CFT] [JANITORIAL] Unbork fs.h |
| |
On 20020104 Daniel Phillips wrote: > >Needing to type 'struct' everywhere is annoying and makes for long lines. >Other than that it's harmless, and actually, the situation where you have two >ways of spelling everything is annoying too. Anyway, if it was to be done, >I'd spell it: > > typedef struct super_struct super; > typedef struct inode_struct inode; > > static inline inode *new_inode(super *sb) > { > inode *ni = (inode *) malloc(sizeof(inode)); > ... > } > >It won't happen though, because it would generate a massive diff for the sole >reason of making things prettier, and a very high percentage of existing >patches would break immediately. If you're going to clean stuff up, you have >to do it a bit at a time while you're working on other things. >
From my point of view, this kind of changes can keep compatability and be done in small chunks if you do something like
typedef struct inode inode_t; typedef struct super_block super_block_t;
so old code still builds, new code can use new types and you can patch code smoothly. And you can grep-r for both usages in the tree.
But all is a matter of preferences. I found it cleaner. Some people hate the _t suffix. Many people prefer explicit 'struct' than opaque types. And so on...
-- J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you... mailto:jamagallon@able.es Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 Linux werewolf 2.4.18-pre1-beo #1 SMP Fri Jan 4 02:25:59 CET 2002 i686 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |