On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 01:08:34 +0100 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Am 24.12.2011 01:35 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
- rename from find_next_included_romentry to get_next_included_romentry
- return a pointer to a rom_entry instead of just its index
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at
The changelog only describes what you're doing, but not the reason why. If you add a short statement about the reason (readability improvement, whatever) to the changelog,
oh that's a hard task. first of all because i dont remember why i did it back then. secondly because there is no obvious reason to change it. the index allows accessing more information than a pointer to just a single object/entry. the benefit as i see it is - as you said - readability. but it is also way more natural to dereference the pointer to an object and then operate on it than accessing it by retrieving it manually from an array. the former hides the retrieving process so that the entries could be stored completely differently so it is also an improvement of segregation.
ha, now it isnt that hard anymore :)
and if you change if (entry == NULL) { to if (!entry) {
i really hate, when c programmers do that. imho it's less readable without any worthy benefits, especially if used in single-term ifs. changed anyway.
this is Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net
thanks! will commit it in r1481 if no one beats me to it ;)