| To: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: cleanup switches with cases that can be merged |
| From: | Alexander Clouter <alex@digriz.org.uk> |
| Date: | Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:47:29 +0000 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org |
| References: | <4B56475F.8070608@gmail.com> <4B56641E.1030803@caviumnetworks.com> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | tin/1.9.3-20080506 ("Dalintober") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.26-2-sparc64-smp (sparc64)) |
In gmane.linux.ports.mips.general David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com> wrote: > > [snipped] > > This brings us to the larger question: This is just code churn. Is it > even worthwhile? > Anything which reduces the line count and remove duplication whilst sticking to CodingStyle I would always argue for, but "who am I" :) It at a glance, this type of code churn, shows there are no differences between two classes of <whatever> and the effect is it makes the chunk of code a mental NOOP for the person reading the code. :) To me this is a natural extension of running with Chapter 14 of CodingStyle where you kmalloc using 'sizeof(*p)' rather than 'sizeof(struct *foo)' so reducing the chance of errors later on. Just my thoughts. Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: Snoopy: No problem is so big that it can't be run away from. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: cleanup switches with cases that can be merged, David Daney |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Help in enabling HIGHMEM support / 64 bit support, Anoop P.A. |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: cleanup switches with cases that can be merged, David Daney |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: cleanup switches with cases that can be merged, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |