Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > For example, try to spot the error here: > > ... > F(ALMOST_HAPPY, INFO) \ > F(CANNOT_RECOVER, ERROR) \ > F(COFFEE_IS_EMPTY, WARN) \ > F(JUST_BEING_CHATTY, INFO) \ > F(LIFE_IS_GOOD, INFO) \ > F(MISSING_SOMETHING_VITAL, FATAL_ERROR) \ > F(NEED_TO_SLEEP, WARN) \ > F(SOMETHING_WENT_WRONG, ERROR) \ > ...
But that is not what is being suggested at all. I already said that FIRST_SOMETHING is fine as a measure to initialize, didn't I? I am only saying that if you have a place to store customized level, you should initialize that part with default levels and always look it up from that place at runtime. It is perfectly fine for the initialization step to take advantage of the ordering and FIRST_SOMETHING constants. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
