Re: [-mm patch] #if 0 mm/backing-dev.c:congestion_wait_interruptible()

["Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>]

On 13/06/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 02:40:06PM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On 12/06/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> >> congestion_wait_interruptible() is no longer used.
> >>
> > Remind me again why it is that we add all these  #if 0  blocks instead
> > of simply removing the unused code?
> >
> > It's just creating a janitorial task to go and remove all the #if 0
> > bits at a later time, seems like pointless churn to me. If the code
> > needs to go, let's just get rid of it in one go instead of two.
>
> The #if 0 also handles all "I want to use this code in 6 months"
> comments that might come (and in some rare cases it even gets used
> later).
>
Well, if it is going to be used in 6 months it's just as easy to add
the code back at that point as it is to remove the  #if 0  bits. Or
simply not remove it in the first place - if it's going to be used in
6 months, all we gain from  #if 0  is slightly smaller binary size for
6 months ... a bit pointless don't you think?

> My primary intention is to remove dead code from bloating the kernel
> image, and this way the probability of patch acceptance is higher.
>
I have no objections to removing dead code. That's a fine objective.
My only concern is that eventually we'll be left with a mountain of
code inside  #if 0  that noone ever cleans up.

I guess I could start grep'ing the surce for "#if 0" at regular
intervals and removing any instances that were added >6months ago...
Something inside me just screams that I shouldn't have to :-)

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html