[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] posix-clock: Use an unsigned data type for a variable
>>>> Reuse the type from this poll call instead.
>>> Why use uint when the function return type it unsigned int?
>> Do you prefer to express the type modifier once more there?
> I don't know what the sentence means,

Can it be a matter of taste if the key word "unsigned" should be repeated
in such an use case?

> but I think that the type should be referenced in a consistent manner.

How do involved software designers and developers prefer to achieve
data type consistency here?

Which kind of naming convention will get priority?

>>> On the other hand, why is the function return type unsigned int
>>> when there is a return of a negative constant?
>> This implementation detail can trigger further software development
>> considerations, can't it?
> It would seem reasonable to address all of the signed/unsigned issues
> related to the function return value at once.

Would you like to extend another evolving script for the semantic patch language?

I imagine that the general issue around the exception handling will cause
too many software development challenges to tackle them "at once".


 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-20 14:41    [W:0.045 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site