Re: flags_t

From: Jes Sorensen (
Date: Thu Aug 24 2000 - 10:22:18 EST

>>>>> "Cesar" == Cesar Eduardo Barros <> writes:

Cesar> On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 10:05:04PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> No it wouldn't, on some architectures it is safe to do
>> safe_flags() on a short type, like a short which can then be used
>> in the architecture specific code.

Cesar> Then the typedef could be architeture-specific. Or you could
Cesar> use two typedefs.

No it shouldn't, when using it in data structures you want it as is as
unsigned long for proper alignment of data.

>> typedef's for the sake of typedef's is not a good idea.

Cesar> It's not for the sake of it, it's for extra type safety.

Wrong, a lot of people keep thinking lets add yet another 500
typedef's but they don't buy you anything except complexity and
confusion. You can still play games directly on the original data

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:13 EST