Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use XMEMCMP_NEQ instead of mem_neq #60

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2015
Merged

Use XMEMCMP_NEQ instead of mem_neq #60

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2015

Conversation

pascal-brand38
Copy link

mem_neq is no more used directly. XMEMCMP_NEQ is used instead,
in the same way XMEMCMP, XMEMCPY,... are.

Signed-off-by: Pascal Brand pascal.brand@st.com

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.0%) to 86.69% when pulling 793a98a on pascal-brand-st-dev:memneq into dfa938a on libtom:develop.

@sjaeckel
Copy link
Member

should we probably rename the macro to match the function name to avoid confusion?
XMEMCMP_NEQ sounds to me like a weird macro that uses memcmp and does some magic around it

@pascal-brand38
Copy link
Author

Sure. What name do you propose (I have no preference in mind)?

@sjaeckel
Copy link
Member

Just to match the macro XMEM_NEQ?!

mem_neq is no more used directly. XMEM_NEQ is used instead,
in the same way XMEMCMP, XMEMCPY,... are.

Signed-off-by: Pascal Brand <pascal.brand@st.com>
@pascal-brand38
Copy link
Author

Done.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.0%) to 86.69% when pulling f20b5da on pascal-brand-st-dev:memneq into dfa938a on libtom:develop.

sjaeckel added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2015
Use XMEM_NEQ instead of mem_neq
@sjaeckel sjaeckel merged commit 925f1ec into libtom:develop Feb 27, 2015
@sjaeckel sjaeckel modified the milestone: v2.0.0 Feb 21, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants