From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][2.5] Single linked lists for Linux, overly complicated v2
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 18:05:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E17wPWO-0005up-00@starship> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020930160434.Q13755@bitchcake.off.net>
On Monday 30 September 2002 22:04, Zach Brown wrote:
> but really, I think these are DOA.
No argument there.
> having to define a single magical
> structure member makes these more trouble than they're worth. I've come
> to prefer wli's 'struct list' approach. It has the added benefit of
> actually being sanely implementable with shared code, something
> ridiculously low memory setups might appreciate.
Have you tried it in a real program? I have. It's not nice to use.
My original response to Bill:
> > How's this look?
>
> Unfortunately, not good. You get code like:
>
> foo = (struct mylist *) slist_pop((slist *) &somelist->next);
>
> So type safety goes out the window, and you gain some niceness in the
> definition in exchange for ugliness in usage, the wrong tradeoff imho.
Single linked lists are so simple - just write the darn code out in
full. Yes, the fact that you can't sanely generalize these things shows
that C as a language falls a few cards short of a full deck, but we knew
that. It makes nice kernels, it does not make art.
--
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-01 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20020926142547.N13817@bitchcake.off.net>
2002-09-26 18:45 ` [PATCH][2.5] Single linked lists for Linux, overly complicated v2 Thunder from the hill
2002-09-26 19:29 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-26 19:43 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-26 20:00 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-26 20:10 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-26 21:13 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-26 21:19 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-27 0:57 ` Zach Brown
2002-09-27 20:08 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-27 20:39 ` Zach Brown
2002-09-27 20:52 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-28 9:45 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-30 19:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-30 20:04 ` Zach Brown
[not found] ` <E17w7N8-0005px-00@starship>
2002-09-30 20:50 ` Zach Brown
2002-10-01 16:05 ` Daniel Phillips [this message]
2002-09-26 19:49 ` David B. Stevens
[not found] <924963807@toto.iv>
2002-09-27 3:56 ` Peter Chubb
2002-09-27 7:27 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2002-09-27 14:56 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-30 19:48 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-26 17:41 Lightweight Patch Manager
2002-09-26 17:53 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-26 18:26 ` Thunder from the hill
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E17wPWO-0005up-00@starship \
--to=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).