From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752549Ab1HPPoS (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:44:18 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:54496 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751426Ab1HPPoR (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:44:17 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:47:45 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Mathias Krause , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: clearify structure initializer in notify_write() Message-ID: <20110816164745.5b38b408@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110816150452.GL10560@shale.localdomain> References: <1312027319-1402-1-git-send-email-minipli@googlemail.com> <20110816150452.GL10560@shale.localdomain> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:04:52 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Mathias Krause wrote: > > > Even though this is valid C we should not mix C99 initializers with > > > obfuscated ANSI C. > > I saw this patch the first time and I couldn't figure out why the > original code was written that way. I'm curious, is there some trick > here that I don't see, or is it just a typo that happens to work? Typo looking at the original commit