Messages in this thread | | | From | Bruno Randolf <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6] Add generic exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA) function | Date | Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:50:12 +0900 |
| |
On Mon November 15 2010 16:38:39 Stefan Richter wrote: > On Nov 15 Bruno Randolf wrote: > > On Sun November 14 2010 17:51:08 Stefan Richter wrote: > > > BTW, isn't "get" more usually used as a prefix for these kinds of > > > functions in kernel APIs? "get" as a suffix more often means "get > > > a reference" alias increase reference count rather than "get the > > > value". > > > > Umm. I don't know and honstly I don't care. I think the API ewma_* is > > consistent. If you have a good reason to change it please let me > > know, otherwise i'd just leave it like it is now. > > It is not about consistency of the API in itself but about consistency > with the rest of the kernel. Cf. skb_get vs. get_unaligned and many > more. I for one immediately think of "something is having its > reference count incremented here" when I come across a something_get > when reading code. > > I don't know of such a convention being documented anywhere. But for an > overkill of examples of "get" as prefix and suffix, grep for get_ and > _get( in include/. The same convention exists IME with "put" that > either writes a value or drops a reference. > > Sorry for bringing this up so late but it is IMO not a trivial point.
That's allright, and I have no problem changing it.
So what would you prefer? And what is the opinion of other people?
bruno
| |