[PATCH] misc size-shrinkage; merges
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Tue Aug 29 21:09:30 UTC 2006
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 3:22 pm, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> >The URL you gave is 404.
>
> I saved that .config also to
> http://busybox.net/~aldot/bb/busybox.config.Breeze
>
> Not sure why you think pointing out a bug insults you.
I start the day by reading a patch from you with a comment that implies I'm
not doing my job. Another patch from you broke building in my tree. #2 in
your list started with some kind of strange ultimatum ("I won't take this
into my tree"), and #1 implies that the entire tree is unusable due to the
vagueness of the bug report.
Contextually, it didn't improve my mood.
> I changed the type of n to avoid compiler warnings, also (IIRC, would
> have to look) i and n were used for two things, which created bigger
> code for gcc-4.0.
Ok.
> >little gem:
> >
> > int dd_main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> >+#define sync_flag (1<<0)
> >+#define noerror (1<<1)
> >+#define trunc_flag (1<<2)
> >+#define twobufs_flag (1<<3)
> >+ int flags = trunc_flag;
> >
> >Yup, #define constants mixed in with variable declarations in a function
>
> As you can see, trunc_flag is used right there, so it's nice to see
> nearby what it is.
Could you move it right before the dd_main and make the macros all caps?
> >(Because the #define will respect the scope of the function, sure! The
>
> You aren't being sarcastic, are you?
Actually, I was.
> >preprocessor knows all about that.) And they're lower case to look like
> >normal variables, because putting them in ALL_CAPS would give away the
secret
> >that they're preprocessor macros, and we wouldn't want to do that...
>
> I just copy and pasted them from the original names. You wouldn't assign
> anything to them, or wouldn't be able to anyway.
The original names were variables that values got assigned to. The new ones
are constant masks applied to a bitfield. You changed the role but carefully
preserved the name.
> >I mostly hold my tongue about this sort of thing, but not when the person
who
> >commits this stuff starts insulting the job I'm doing.
>
> Again, someone on IRC pointed out a bug, didn't want to subscribe to the
> list, and stated the fact that trunk doesn fail his example. That
> example did work before. No idea why you think that's a personal insult.
I'd like to know which commit broke it because tracking it down is likely to
be fun otherwise. (We're tickling something strange in glibc, which is
always a bad sign.)
Rob
--
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
More information about the busybox
mailing list