Re: Coding style RFC: convert "for (i=0;i<ARRAY_SIZE(array);i++)"to "array_for_each(index, array)"

[Bernd Petrovitsch]

On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 21:54 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 18:42 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > 
> >>Joe Perches wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> >>>perhaps:
> >>>
> >>>#define array_for_each(element, array) \
> >>>	for ((element) = (array); \
> >>>	     (element) < ((array) + ARRAY_SIZE((array))); \
> >>>	     (element)++)
> >>
> >>If you're going for consistency, then shouldn't this be
> >>array_for_each_entry()?
> > 
> > 
> > That depends on the decision between consistency to array_for_each_index
> > or consistency to list_for_each.
> 
> I don't follow.

Yes, thinko on my side. Sorry.

> list_for_each gives you a list_head.
> list_for_each_entry gives you a pointer to an entry in the list, which
> is equivalent to the above loop which gives a pointer to an entry in the
> array. Accordingly, it should be called array_for_each_entry. What sort
> of logic leads to another conclusion?

The wrong logic that list_for_each gives an entry. Sorry f.t. confusion.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/