Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> writes:

> no, but the selinux fix will need it (partially out of laziness, partially
> to make the code nicer).

Ok. I'll merged it in then.

>> (the more I see of these twisty list macros, the more I prefer
>> open-coded lists though; wow this is hard to understand).
>
> given how often we've found bugs in open-coded lists I disagree.
> yes, they're hairy but they're tested, the macro behaves the same
> everywhere. and if you really worry about the code being wrong, run it
> through the pre-processor and it will look like an open-coded list.

It's all a tradeoff -- I just don't like having to learn a new
programming language each time I see a new set of list macros (or other
macro programming of this nature). Reminds me of how loathsome C++
templates are.

-- 
[email protected]

Attachment: pgpMw7u14z701.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Reply via email to