[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       git
Subject:    Re: [PATCH 2/3] refactor: use bitsizeof() instead of 8 * sizeof()
From:       Pierre Habouzit <madcoder () madism ! org>
Date:       2009-07-23 6:22:50
Message-ID: 20090723062250.GH4750 () laphroaig ! corp
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:09:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:34:34PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >
> >>  #define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x)/sizeof(x[0]))
> >> +#define bitsizeof(x)  (CHAR_BIT * sizeof(x))
> >
> > Isn't our style to use all-caps for macros? I.e., BITSIZEOF?
> 
> Perhaps but I'd say similarity between sizeof() and bitsizeof() calls for
> consistency in the lowercase in this particular case.

Yes, I usually have a few other macros that I use in code I write,
namely bitsizeof, fieldsizeof, fieldtypeof and a couple other, and all
are lowercased because:
  - it's a safe macro (doesn't multi-evaluate its arguments), hence the
    user doesn't really need to know it's a macro ;
  - similarity with sizeof().

-- 
Intersec <http://www.intersec.com>
Pierre Habouzit <pierre.habouzit@intersec.com>
Tél : +33 (0)1 5570 3346
Mob : +33 (0)6 1636 8131
Fax : +33 (0)1 5570 3332
37 Rue Pierre Lhomme
92400 Courbevoie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]