Re: /proc/#/ctl removal

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <afceb814-7e17-39af-c26f-592fb3843ced%softjar.se@localhost>,
Johnny Billquist  <bqt%softjar.se@localhost> wrote:
>On 2017-08-27 14:09, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
>> On 08/27/2017 03:59 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>> LGTM, perhaps leave a comment /* old P_FSTRACEÂ Â Â  0x00010000 */
>>> instead of completely removing the constants for now as a reminder.
>> 
>> Isn't that sort of duplicating what CVS does?
>
>I would say no. CVS allows you to go back in history, see what changed, 
>see how things were before, and so on.
>Documenting something in the code is useful for people who are writing 
>code. It would be impossible to always go back and check the full 
>history of every file when you are doing work. If there is something 
>that is useful for the future to be aware of, it needs to be documented 
>in the code, including if it is something of related to history.
>
>If it is totally irrelevant for future code writing, then there is no 
>need to keep any comment in the code, but if, for example, some constant 
>of value in a larger range historically was used for something, this is 
>important to keep around, even if it is no longer used, as it should 
>maybe be left unused/undefined, and if you need some new value, you 
>should grab a different one. If you get what I mean.

Bottom line:

It is a lot of extra work to riffle though cvs versions to find if the
unused bit was ever allocated, what was it used for, and when was it
deleted when you want to use one of the unused bits for something new.
The comment helps, but it is not the end of the world if it is not
there.

christos