[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: [PATCH] updated diff for libdvdread-0.9.5

[The Wanderer]

Rich Felker wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 04:32:06AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
>> Rich Felker wrote:

>>> Incidentally, using UINT8_MAX UINT16_MAX and INT32_MAX is
>>> absolutely idiotic. These are not system-specific limits but the
>>> numbers 255, 65535, and 2147483647.
>> 
>> That doesn't necessarily make it idiotic to use symbolic names for
>> them; it makes the code (potentially/arguably) more readable, by
>> referring to the reason why this specific number is being used
>> instead of just having an apparently arbitrary number. I've done
>> vaguely similar things in some of my own code, a few times in the
>> past, albeit with names I defined myself rather than more broadly
>> general ones.
> 
> (1<<8)-1, etc. are quite readable and explicit at the same time..
> Same goes for 0xff, 0xffff, ...

Point. I wouldn't find the former syntax especially readable, but that's
almost certainly because I'm not yet intuitively familiar with the
concept of bitshifting; the latter syntax is quite comprehensible to me.
I'm not necessarily willing to start calling the use of the symbolic
names idiotic, but I am willing to concede the issue. ^_^

-- 
       The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.