On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:20:11PM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 8,  8:45am, thorpej@shagadelic.org (Jason Thorpe) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys
> 
> | 
> | On Mar 7, 2006, at 9:26 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | 
> | > And they are already causing conflicts [BITS is defined in zlib].
> | > Maybe prefix all the generic names with BIT_?
> | > BIT -> BIT_GET_MASK
> | > BITS -> BIT_GET_MASK_BETWEEN
> | 
> | 
> | > ISSET -> BIT_ISSET
> | > CLR -> BIT_CLEAR
> | > SET -> BIT_SET
> | 
> | These three are unlike the others... ISSET(), CLR(), and SET()  
> | operate on masks, whereas the other ones operate on bit positions.   
> | So, you would either have to change the usage of these three macros  
> | to match the bit position semantics (otherwise confusion would  
> | flourish), or these should be called BITMASK_ISSET(), BITMASK_CLR(),  
> | BITMASK_SET() (so much for saving the extra typing!).
> 
> Yes, but the names are nice. I like BITMASK instead of BIT.

I changed the names last night, BIT -> __BIT, BITS -> __BITS.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933