>>>> Reuse the type from this poll call instead. >>> >>> Why use uint when the function return type it unsigned int? >> >> Do you prefer to express the type modifier once more there? > > I don't know what the sentence means,
Can it be a matter of taste if the key word "unsigned" should be repeated in such an use case? > but I think that the type should be referenced in a consistent manner. How do involved software designers and developers prefer to achieve data type consistency here? Which kind of naming convention will get priority? >>> On the other hand, why is the function return type unsigned int >>> when there is a return of a negative constant? >> >> This implementation detail can trigger further software development >> considerations, can't it? > > It would seem reasonable to address all of the signed/unsigned issues > related to the function return value at once. Would you like to extend another evolving script for the semantic patch language? I imagine that the general issue around the exception handling will cause too many software development challenges to tackle them "at once". Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
