[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Reinhard Meyer]

Hello Wolfgang,

I heard rumors that the SZ_* defines are going to be outphased.

If so, new submissions should not use them anymore, right?

Best Regards,
Reinhard

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Reinhard Meyer,

In message <4D3FDB14.6060004@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
> 
> I heard rumors that the SZ_* defines are going to be outphased.

I's on my personal hate list, indeed.

> If so, new submissions should not use them anymore, right?

Right.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
When you die, the first thing you lose is your life. The  next  thing
is the illusions.                       - Terry Pratchett, _Pyramids_

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Eric Bénard]

Hi Wolfgang,

On 26/01/2011 10:20, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
 > In message<4D3FDB14.6060004@emk-elektronik.de>  you wrote:
 >>
 >> I heard rumors that the SZ_* defines are going to be outphased.
 >
 > I's on my personal hate list, indeed.
 >
 >> If so, new submissions should not use them anymore, right?
 >
 > Right.
 >
so what is the recommended way to write size ?

Thanks,
Eric

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Reinhard Meyer]

Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Dear Reinhard Meyer,
> 
> In message <4D3FDB14.6060004@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>>
>> I heard rumors that the SZ_* defines are going to be outphased.
> 
> I's on my personal hate list, indeed.
> 
>> If so, new submissions should not use them anymore, right?
> 
> Right.

OK, I can understand that for having a define for each of the 64 possible values
(1<<0) .. (1<<63) can be annoying.

Will the preffered methods be
xx << 10 for KiB
xx << 20 for MiB
xx << 30 for GiB and so on?

Or might we have a few macros like

#define KiB(x) ((x) << 10)
#define MiB(x) ((x) << 20) and so on?

That would reduce all to about 6 defines.

Best Regards,
Reinhard

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eric_B=E9nard?=,

In message <4D3FE967.7050708@eukrea.com> you wrote:
>
> so what is the recommended way to write size ?

In a readable way.

If you need 2k, write it as 2000 or 2*1000 or similar.

If you need 2 Ki, write it as 2048 or 2*1024 or (2 << 10) or similar.


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Q:  What's a light-year?
A:  One-third less calories than a regular year.

[U-Boot] Question: is SZ_* going to be removed or not?

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Reinhard Meyer,

In message <4D3FECB2.1010007@emk-elektronik.de> you wrote:
>
> Will the preffered methods be
> xx << 10 for KiB
> xx << 20 for MiB
> xx << 30 for GiB and so on?

Please note that the binary prefixes kibi and mebi not might be used
for other things than bytes as well. And if we were trying to be
precise, wie might want to use "octets" instead of bytes anyway ;-)

I think it's largely a matter of taste and experience whether you
prefer (2 << 30) or (2 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024). It depends a lot on how
much you work with such numbers - I prefer (2 << 30) because it's
shorter, others find the "* 1024" notation easier to read.

But no matter what you prefer -@least both variants are readable.

> Or might we have a few macros like
> 
> #define KiB(x) ((x) << 10)
> #define MiB(x) ((x) << 20) and so on?

Why should we use any such macros at all? Just write the plain
numbers in the code so everybody can understand it without having to
look up the definition.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Severe culture shock results when experts from another protocol suite
[...] try to read OSI documents. The term "osified" is used to  refer
to  such  documents. [...] Any relationship to the word "ossified" is
purely intentional.                                - Marshall T. Rose