On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Sebastian Huber <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2014-03-26 18:43, Gedare Bloom wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool _Thread_Is_life_restarted( >>>>>> >>> >+ Thread_Life_state life_state >>>>>> >>> >+) >>>>>> >>> >+{ >>>>>> >>> >+ return ( life_state & THREAD_LIFE_RESTARTED ) != 0; >>>>>> >>> >+} >>>>>> >>> >+ >>>>>> >>> >+RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool _Thread_Is_life_terminated( >>>>>> >>> >+ Thread_Life_state life_state >>>>>> >>> >+) >>>>>> >>> >+{ >>>>>> >>> >+ return ( life_state & THREAD_LIFE_TERMINATED ) != 0; >>>>>> >>> >+} >>>>>> >>> >+ >>>>>> >>> >+RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool _Thread_Is_life_protected( >>>>>> >>> >+ Thread_Life_state life_state >>>>>> >>> >+) >>>>>> >>> >+{ >>>>>> >>> >+ return ( life_state & THREAD_LIFE_PROTECTED ) != 0; >>>>>> >>> >+} >>>>>> >>> >+ >>>>>> >>> >+RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool _Thread_Is_life_change_requested( >>>>>> >>> >+ Thread_Life_state life_state >>>>>> >>> >+) >>>>>> >>> >+{ >>>>>> >>> >+ return ( life_state & THREAD_LIFE_RESTARTED_TERMINATED ) != 0; >>>>>> >>> >+} >>>>>> >>> >+ >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>And also doxygen for these functions, and consider using the present >>>> >>tense for restarting, terminating >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >Why would you document functions like this? >>> > >> >> For the sake of completeness. > > > To do something for completeness is a bad argument. > Yeah.
> >> However, the only one that really needs >> it is the last one. It is not quite clear from the name what it >> entails. >> > > I see really no sense in adding documentation for functions that test two > bits and are not part of the application API. > Perhaps not, but there is a difference between documenting something for end users, and documenting something for the next person to come along to maintain the kernel code. If a function/macro use is not obvious from its name, then there needs to be some documentation on it. > What about the name _Thread_Is_life_changing()? > Yes this is clearer. Thanks, Gedare > > -- > Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH > > Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany > Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 > Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 > E-Mail : [email protected] > PGP : Public key available on request. > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. _______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
