Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 14:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Mon, 07 May 2007 14:50:19 -0500 James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 00:35 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Richard Knutsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Convert: FALSE - false TRUE - true NAK'd by maintainer. I went back and reviewed the previous discussion. Maintaner's reasons for NAKing were, and remain wholly specious. Well, I agree with them. There are three primary reasons for this 1. In C logical values are arithmetic types by design. Trying to backfill C++ ideas of separation of logical and arithmetic types is asking for bugs. 2. If people have to use boolean values (which I don't like; I prefer simple assignment and checking), I prefer the upper case values because, effectively, they're simple arithmetical constants. 3. it's going to generate a huge amount of churn in all the subsystems and drivers for no appreciable benefit. Unless someone can actually articulate one? (Other than because it's there). The patch in question basically just downcased the TRUE/FALSE in the driver, which makes it less readable (mainly because I really don't like the way it uses truth values, but that's a maintainer's prerogative, and I recognise the upper case values as warning me to be careful). That being said, the patch is moderately wrong (or at least incomplete) because it does things like: -unsigned char done = FALSE; +unsigned char done = false; whereas it should have done -unsigned char done = FALSE; +bool done = false; And the value to the driver of this transformation? James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Tue, 08 May 2007 14:24:32 -0500 James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, could we compromise and just add TRUE = true, FALSE = false to the enum? That sounds sane. But I don't recall all the details of the discussion and perhaps I'm missing something. I think the whole bool/true/false thing is pretty dissatisfactory really. Java gets this right and C cannot and will not and we end up with people using true and false as plain old 1 and 0. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 13:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 08 May 2007 14:24:32 -0500 James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, could we compromise and just add TRUE = true, FALSE = false to the enum? That sounds sane. But I don't recall all the details of the discussion and perhaps I'm missing something. I think the whole bool/true/false thing is pretty dissatisfactory really. Java gets this right and C cannot and will not and we end up with people using true and false as plain old 1 and 0. Right, that's the core of my complaint ... zero is false and anything else is true ... I rather like the C isms that allow things like if (ptr) *ptr = ... If there were evidence that the C treatment of logicals as arithmeticals was causing huge problems for driver writers, then yes I'd reconsider my position ... but really any driver writer has to use bare metal arithmetical values interchangeably with logical values because that's the way device registers work. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
From: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 13:11:52 -0700 On Tue, 08 May 2007 14:24:32 -0500 James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, could we compromise and just add TRUE = true, FALSE = false to the enum? That sounds sane. But I don't recall all the details of the discussion and perhaps I'm missing something. I think the whole bool/true/false thing is pretty dissatisfactory really. Java gets this right and C cannot and will not and we end up with people using true and false as plain old 1 and 0. I think it's more important to be consistent across the entire tree, whatever we choose, than to be nice and add compat define hacks for the sake of a select few stubborn drivers. If you're going to add those ugly #define TRUE true bits, the whole point of the change is lost so you might as not make it at all. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 14:44 -0700, David Miller wrote: From: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 13:11:52 -0700 On Tue, 08 May 2007 14:24:32 -0500 James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, could we compromise and just add TRUE = true, FALSE = false to the enum? That sounds sane. But I don't recall all the details of the discussion and perhaps I'm missing something. I think the whole bool/true/false thing is pretty dissatisfactory really. Java gets this right and C cannot and will not and we end up with people using true and false as plain old 1 and 0. In that case, I think we go with what's there, which seems to be predominantly TRUE/FALSE. I think it's more important to be consistent across the entire tree, whatever we choose, than to be nice and add compat define hacks for the sake of a select few stubborn drivers. If you're going to add those ugly #define TRUE true bits, the whole point of the change is lost so you might as not make it at all. That too wouldn't be an unacceptable outcome ... James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 00:35 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Richard Knutsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Convert: FALSE - false TRUE - true NAK'd by maintainer. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
On Mon, 7 May 2007 14:06:56 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: so I'll drop it on those grounds, not on the bogus ones. However it will come back again. All subsystem-private implementations of TRUE and FALSE are in the firing line now. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [patch 16/30] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
Andrew Morton wrote: On Mon, 7 May 2007 14:06:56 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: so I'll drop it on those grounds, not on the bogus ones. However it will come back again. All subsystem-private implementations of TRUE and FALSE are in the firing line now. Amen. But should we let it rest until most of the other (boolean) conversions are done (as with CIFS and XFS (iirc)), otherwise I can take a new stab at it this weekend. Btw Andrew, do you want me to Cc: you all the patches or should I continue to first send them to (hopefully the correct) maintainer(s)/ML, and send them your way if they are not picked up (is one week enough, or should it be longer?) Regards Richard Knutsson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
