Re: Patch(?): pci_device_id tables for linux-2.4.0-test11/drivers/block

[Jeff Garzik]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 05:14:38PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > *This* is the over-engineering attitude I was talking about.  The only
> > reason why you are preferring named initializers is because
> > pci_device_id MIGHT be changed.  And if it is changed, it makes the
> > changeover just tad easier.  For that, you ugly up the code and make it
> > more difficult to maintain.
> 
> The other reason is that it makes self documenting code -- no need to look
> up the structure definition to make sense out of the code.

For the general case, that is true.

But note that the general case is usually a -single- structure being
initialized, not an array of structures.  Unless the struct members
being initialized vary wildly from one array element to another, using
named initialized it redundant and -reduces- the ability of the
programmer to look at the pci_tbl[] and evaluate its contents at a
glance.

PCI tables do not use named initalizers on purpose.  It was not an
accident or design mistake.

	Jeff

-- 
Jeff Garzik             |
Building 1024           | The chief enemy of creativity is "good" sense
MandrakeSoft            |          -- Picasso