On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 15:01 -0400, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
Putting code into the parameter list of wait_event_timeout() might be
legal C-code but not really readable - the "inline" code is simply
moved into a function and that passed to wait_event_timeout() as the
condition.
Arguably, that's even more unreadable since if you don't know this macro
well you might assume the function is called only once, which is clearly
not true...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to this change, but if you ask me
it's not completely clear that this makes it more readable.
johannes
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 15:01 -0400, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
quoted
Putting code into the parameter list of wait_event_timeout() might be
legal C-code but not really readable - the "inline" code is simply
moved into a function and that passed to wait_event_timeout() as the
condition.
Arguably, that's even more unreadable since if you don't know this macro
well you might assume the function is called only once, which is clearly
not true...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to this change, but if you ask me
it's not completely clear that this makes it more readable.
I'm not into this long enough to say what is better and if the consensus
is that this patch is no more readable than the original code
and no more maintainable either, then it is not worth the effort.
so thanks for your comments!
thx!
hofrat
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 20:15 +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
I'm not into this long enough to say what is better and if the consensus
is that this patch is no more readable than the original code
and no more maintainable either, then it is not worth the effort.
Personally, I like the change, it might even make that function more
reusable etc., and it gets rid of the ({ ... }) expression syntax which
I always find a bit odd :)
johannes