On Sun, Mar 3, 2019, 1:29 PM Ian Lepore <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2019-03-03 at 12:20 -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: > > > On Mar 3, 2019, at 11:12, Steven Hartland <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Not really much more to say that isn't explained by that and the > > > code. > > > > > > Sure I could have used a different sentence structure for the body > > > but it wouldn't add anything IMO, thoughts? > > > > Why the previous sector size was wrong isn’t clear from the > > commit message. Why switch from a sizeof to 0? > > Cheers! > > -Enji > > > > The commit message said it was "incorrect / unused". While a bit terse, > it does communicate that the old value was incorrect (by being there at > all) because the value is unused (so zero more clearly expresses that). >
Correct. The standard also encourages that for future proofing the code. Though in this case this opcode is so old, there is almost zero chance it will change. Warner It's not completely a joke that most English-speaking software > engineers have English as a second language. :) > > -- Ian > > > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
