From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762891AbbA3Rce (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:32:34 -0500 Received: from st11p01mm-asmtpout002.mac.com ([17.172.204.237]:36316 "EHLO st11p01mm-asmtp002.mac.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751401AbbA3Rcc (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:32:32 -0500 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.13.68,1.0.33,0.0.0000 definitions=2015-01-30_05:2015-01-30,2015-01-30,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1412080000 definitions=main-1501300178 From: Louis Langholtz Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] int to bool conversion Message-id: <6D4461BF-FD0F-4DA8-BFC8-00F9349A98DC@me.com> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 10:32:06 -0700 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org While it may not be productive to perturb seemingly working code (as Rafael argues), it may also not be productive to have decreased code readability (as Quentin suggests). Personally I prefer readability enhancements over worrying about possibly breaking working code. I don't want to start a flame war so I won't go into arguing this as a better position. I'd just like to thank Quentin for his efforts to identify boolean uses of variables. It's something I'm interested in as well and have been working on in a branch of my own git repository. Quentin if you want to work on this together at all, that'd be great. Please contact me directly as I'm not subscribed to the LKML. As for the original semantic patch code, it's unlikely that it would be safe to not exclude variables that are passed by address (and seemingly the ampersand operator applied on x - as in '&x' - should be a part of the exclusion set). Lou