Re: share/private/slave a subtree - define vs enum

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Pekka J Enberg wrote:

> I don't see how the following is tortured: 
> enum {
>       PNODE_MEMBER_VFS  = 0x01,
>       PNODE_SLAVE_VFS   = 0x02
> }; 
> In fact, I think it is more natural. An almost identical example even appears
> in K&R. 

So it basically comes down to personal preference, if the original uses 
defines and it works fine, I don't really see a good enough reason to 
change it to enums, so please leave the decision to author.

bye, Roman
-
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/