Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: Why not empty defines?Re: Why not empty defines?
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
From: Linus Nielsen Feltzing <linus_at_haxx.se>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:45:58 +0100
Burelli Luca wrote:
> Question: why don't define cpu_boost to be an empty macro on targets
> that don't support cpu frequencies? That would make the code much more
> readable, IMHO. (This is just an example, there are several one-line,
> binary #ifdefs that could be swept away).
This is the intention. Those #ifdefs are mistakes.
Linus
Received on 2005-11-17
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:45:58 +0100
Burelli Luca wrote:
> Question: why don't define cpu_boost to be an empty macro on targets
> that don't support cpu frequencies? That would make the code much more
> readable, IMHO. (This is just an example, there are several one-line,
> binary #ifdefs that could be swept away).
This is the intention. Those #ifdefs are mistakes.
Linus
Received on 2005-11-17
Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy