Re: [patch] Workqueue Abstraction, 2.5.40-H7

["Kevin O'Connor" <kevin@koconnor.net>]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:29:02PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Pease don't introduce more typedefs. They only hide what the hell the
> > thing is, which is actively _bad_ for structures, since passing a
[...]
> Despite all the previous fuss about the problems of typedefs, i've never
> had *any* problem with using typedefs in various code i wrote. It only
> ever made things cleaner - to me.

Hi Ingo,

I follow your reasoning, but one thing I don't follow -

+typedef struct work_s {
+       unsigned long pending;
+       struct list_head entry;
+       void (*func)(void *);
+       void *data;
+       void *wq_data;
+       timer_t timer;
+} work_t;

- why two names for the structure ("struct work_s" and "work_t")?

Either convention will work, but by declaring the structure twice it only
encourages users to employ their own favorite - thus defeating the purpose
of a convention.

Just curious,
-Kevin

-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | Kevin O'Connor                     "BTW, IMHO we need a FAQ for      |
 | kevin@koconnor.net                  'IMHO', 'FAQ', 'BTW', etc. !"    |
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------