Re: [PATCH] proc: Use str_yes_no() helper in proc_pid_ksm_stat()

From: Al Viro
Date: Wed Feb 12 2025 - 07:36:29 EST


On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 01:11:08PM +0100, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> /*
> * Here provide a series of helpers in the str_$TRUE_$FALSE format (you can
> * also expand some helpers as needed), where $TRUE and $FALSE are their
> * corresponding literal strings. These helpers can be used in the printing
> * and also in other places where constant strings are required. Using these
> * helpers offers the following benefits:
> * 1) Reducing the hardcoding of strings, which makes the code more elegant
> * through these simple literal-meaning helpers.
> * 2) Unifying the output, which prevents the same string from being printed
> * in various forms, such as enable/disable, enabled/disabled, en/dis.
> * 3) Deduping by the linker, which results in a smaller binary file.
> */

Printf modifiers would've covered all of that, though...

The thing is, <expr> ? "yes" : "no" is visually easier to distinguish than
str_yes_no(<expr>), especially when expression itself is a function call, etc.
So I'd question elegance, actually...