On Wed, 25 May 2011, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em 23-05-2011 16:04, Hans Petter Selasky escreveu:
On Monday 23 May 2011 20:22:02 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Please, inline patches. Otherwise, this is what one gets, when replying.
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Em 23-05-2011 16:04, Hans Petter Selasky escreveu:
On Monday 23 May 2011 20:22:02 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Please, inline patches. Otherwise, this is what one gets, when replying.
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
--HPS
In any case, just throwing in my 2 cents - no idea
--HPS
From 94b88b92763f9309018ba04c200a8842ce1ff0ed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Petter Selasky hsela...@c2i.net
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 13:07:08 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Make code more readable by not using the return value of the WARN() macro. Set ret variable in an undefined case.
Please, inline patches. Otherwise, this is what one gets, when replying.
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
--HPS
In any case, just throwing in my 2 cents - no idea how not using the
return value of WARN() makes code more readable. On the contrary, using it
is a standard
On Monday 23 May 2011 20:22:02 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Please, inline patches. Otherwise, this is what one gets, when replying.
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
--HPS
In any case, just throwing in my 2 cents - no idea how not using the
return value of WARN() makes
