Re: [PATCH] NET: fix wrong English expression in comments

[Daolong Wang]

The patch will make sense for some people. I was puzzled about the
double-negative for quite a while.

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:53 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:39:18 +0000
>
>> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:05 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> > > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ struct inet_bind_bucket;
>> > >  struct inet_timewait_sock {
>> > >   /*
>> > >    * Now struct sock also uses sock_common, so please just
>> > > -  * don't add nothing before this first member (__tw_common) --acme
>> > > +  * don't add anything before this first member (__tw_common) --acme
>> >
>> > They are the same meaning...
>>
>> A double-negative can be an informal way of reinforcing a negative, but
>> can sometimes mean the positive.  So this change would remove a minor
>> ambiguity.  However I think it should be clear that it is not compulsory
>> to add new members to the structure. ;-)
>
> After all of this discussion, I think I'm going to keep this comment
> as-is. :-)
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/