On 2/23/07, Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:You have a point there but I still don't think it should be in bitops.h. Why should we favor long-wrap before byte-wrap, so what do you think about doing:> +#define BITWRAP(nr) (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
> & make the whole input subsystem use it
> The change is huge, more than 125 files using input.h
> & almost all use the BIT macro.
It is as a big of change, but have you dismissed the "BIT(nr %
but just looking at the number of places it is being used,
it seems that adding a new macro would be good
which makes it look short n sweet
Ok> -#define BIT(i) (1UL << ((i)&(__NFDBITS-1)))yes...no users in this file
Are you sure you can just delete this one?
Sounds good> -#define BIT(x) (1ul<<(x))yes
> #define POW2(x) (1ul<<(x))
Maybe you can clean up POW2 as well (or define it as "#define POW2(x)
but want to go one step at a time
currently just cleaning up places where BIT macro is explicitly defined
the implicit uses [replacing 1UL << (x)] will be handled in another patch series
"use BIT macro wherever appropriate"
No problem :)
attaching the patch file
Also, it seems your mail-client swapped the tabs to spaces (aka not able
bear with me for the time being