Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del

[Arne Jansen]

On 06/04/13 16:53, Chris Mason wrote:
> Quoting Christoph Hellwig (2013-06-04 10:48:56)
>> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 03:55:55PM -0400, J??rn Engel wrote:
>>> Actually, when I compare the two invocations, I prefer the
>>> list_for_each_entry_del() variant over list_pop_entry().
>>>
>>>         while ((ref = list_pop_entry(&prefs, struct __prelim_ref, list))) {
>>>         list_for_each_entry_del(ref, &prefs, list) {
>>>
>>> Christoph?
>>
>> I really don't like something that looks like an iterator (*for_each*)
>> to modify a list.  Maybe it's just me, so I'd love to hear others chime
>> in.
> 
> Have to agree with Christoph.  I just couldn't put my finger on why I
> didn't like it until I saw the list_pop_entry suggestion.

list_pop_each_entry?

> 
> -chris
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

--
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/