mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: mbligh@aracnet.com, alex.williamson@hp.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com,
	acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: [PATCH] cleanup ACPI numa warnings
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 14:36:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040808143631.7c18cae9.rddunlap@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040807105729.6adea633.pj@sgi.com>

On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:57:29 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote:

| > And there's nothing in CodingStyle that agrees with you that I could find.
| 
| >From the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
| 
|         3) 'static inline' is better than a macro
| 
|         Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros.
|         They provide type safety, have no length limitations, no formatting
|         limitations, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros.
| 
|         Macros should only be used for cases where a static inline is clearly
|         suboptimal [there a few, isolated cases of this in fast paths],
|         or where it is impossible to use a static inline function [such as
|         string-izing].

Oops.  Thanks, Paul.

I agree that the inline looks better than the macro (more readable,
possibly more maintainable), but not that the multi-line macro
is _evil_ (which is what Martin said).


--
~Randy

  reply	other threads:[~2004-08-08 21:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-05 20:46 Alex Williamson
2004-08-05 21:01 ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-05 21:25   ` Alex Williamson
2004-08-06  3:35     ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-08-06  3:50       ` [ACPI] " Randy.Dunlap
2004-08-07 17:57         ` Paul Jackson
2004-08-08 21:36           ` Randy.Dunlap [this message]
2004-08-09  2:53             ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-08-20 18:55               ` Alex Williamson
2004-08-20 19:22                 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-08-09  4:19             ` Alex Williamson
2004-08-09  4:52               ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-09  5:10                 ` Alex Williamson
2004-08-09  5:44                   ` Dave Hansen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040808143631.7c18cae9.rddunlap@osdl.org \
    --to=rddunlap@osdl.org \
    --cc=acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=alex.williamson@hp.com \
    --cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
    --cc=pj@sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®