Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 21:20 +0300, Nikita Danilov wrote:

> Going off at a tangent (or tangle, rather), why do we need DECLARE_FOO()
> macros at all? They
> 
>  - do not look like C variable declarations, hide variable type, and
>  hence are confusing,
> 
>  - contrary to their naming actually _define_ rather than _declare_ an
>  object.
> 
> In most cases 
> 
>         type var = INIT_FOO;
> 
> is much better (more readable and easier to understand) than
> 
>         DECLARE_FOO(var); /* what is the type of var? */
> 
> In the cases where initializer needs an address of object being
> initialized
> 
>         type var = INIT_FOO(var);
> 
> can be used.

That's just error prone.  In the RT patch we had several bugs caused by
cut and paste errors like:

type foo = INIT_TYPE(foo);
type bar = INIT_TYPE(foo);

These are not always easy to find.

-- Steve


-
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/