Re: [RFC][PATCH 01/11] ftrace/trivial: Clean up recordmcount.c to use Linux style comparisons

From: Thiago Farina <tfransosi@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: John Reiser <jreiser@bitwagon.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 01/11] ftrace/trivial: Clean up recordmcount.c to use Linux style comparisons
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:52:37 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTinENP=hpjZBMFp0Y7EKGH8u-gewPA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1303488341.6225.2.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 12:52 -0300, Thiago Farina wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:09 PM, John Reiser <jreiser@bitwagon.com> wrote:
>> > I consider "0==strcmp(" to be an idiom.  Too often "strcmp(...) == 0"
>> > overflows my mental stack because of the typographic width of the operands
>> > in the source code.  If you still object in this case then please consider
>> > using something like:
>> >        #define strequ(a,b) (strcmp((a), (b)) == 0)
>> > or
>> >        static int strequ(char const *a, char const *b)
>> >        {
>> >                return strcmp(a, b) == 0;
>> >        }
>> > which names the idiom.
>> >
>>
>> Maybe str_eq? Or even just streq? And also just !strcmp(a,b).
>
> streq() is something I woudn't mind.
>
> I've too often confused !strcmp(a,b) as "!streq()" which is not the
> case. Which is why I always use strcmp(a,b) == 0, which to me I see the
> '==' as eq. I also consider strcmp(a,b) != 0 as not equal. Again, the
> mind that sees "==" and "!=" can just translate that to human language.
> Where !strcmp() is just gibberish ;)

I've sent a patch to linux-kernel adding streq macro as suggested and
copied you Steven.

Best regards,