can barebox avoid creating typedefs just for struct shortcuts?
i noticed the following:
$ grep -rw gd_t * arch/arm/include/asm/global_data.h:typedef struct global_data gd_t; arch/ppc/include/asm/global_data.h: * Keep it *SMALL* and remember to set CFG_GBL_DATA_SIZE > sizeof(gd_t) arch/ppc/include/asm/global_data.h:} gd_t; arch/sandbox/include/asm/global_data.h:typedef struct global_data gd_t; $
it's obvious that the typedef "gd_t" is being created as a
time-saving shortcut. that approach has been actively discouraged in the main kernel tree for quite some time, as it just obfuscates the code. there are, of course, numerous typedefs being used to support legitimately opaque types, but creating more of them just to save keystrokes is now frowned upon.
and since it looks like no one is actually using that one yet, does
anyone mind if i remove it?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
Quoted 10 lines · Robert P. J. Day
i noticed the following:
$ grep -rw gd_t * arch/arm/include/asm/global_data.h:typedef struct global_data gd_t; arch/ppc/include/asm/global_data.h: * Keep it *SMALL* and remember to set CFG_GBL_DATA_SIZE > sizeof(gd_t) arch/ppc/include/asm/global_data.h:} gd_t; arch/sandbox/include/asm/global_data.h:typedef struct global_data gd_t; $
Quoted 4 lines
it's obvious that the typedef "
gd_t" is being created as a
time-saving shortcut. that approach has been actively discouraged in the main kernel tree for quite some time, as it just obfuscates the code.
Ack. I normally remove the typedefs when I find them.
In barebox we do not have global_data, so the whole file can be removed.
Quoted 6 lines
there are, of course, numerous typedefs being used to support legitimately opaque types, but creating more of them just to save keystrokes is now frowned upon.
and since it looks like no one is actually using that one yet, does
anyone mind if i remove it?
Nope, go ahead.
Sascha
Signature · 9 lines
Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox