From: Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>, backports@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] backports: always use new version compare macros
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:29:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87146aa0-81b9-d5e9-0700-701fb36c6d61@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1486926706.5142.1.camel@sipsolutions.net>
On 12-2-2017 20:11, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-02-11 at 22:45 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>>
>> On 7-2-2017 23:08, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> It's some churn, but I think worthwhile - any objections?
>>
>> I find comparison operators more clear, but it is probably just a
>> matter of getting used to it. What makes it worthwile? As you already
>> did the churn I do not have any objections. Just curious.
>
> So to be honest, I actually pushed the change more or less by accident,
> I'm happy to back it out again.
I suspect the churn was not in pushing the change :-p I am fine with it.
> My reasoning was something along these lines: First, I find it awkward
> to always type the long form when we always have the same patterns.
> Especially with the IN_RANGE() part, which I haven't even fully
> converted I think. So that's my immediate motivation for adding it, but
> as the de-facto maintainer now I'd also want people to really be able
> to figure out which pattern they should use, regardless of whether
> they're looking at old or new bits, so unifying it (towards the new one
> because I'm a lazy bastard) seemed like a good idea.
Agree that a mix of old and new macros is not what we want. I am lazy
too so thanks.
Regards,
Arend
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-12 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-07 22:07 [RFC] backports: always use new version compare macros Johannes Berg
2017-02-07 22:08 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-10 22:48 ` Steve deRosier
2017-02-11 21:45 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-12 19:11 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-12 19:29 ` Arend Van Spriel [this message]
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=87146aa0-81b9-d5e9-0700-701fb36c6d61@broadcom.com \
--to=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=backports@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.