Felix Held wrote: > While I find the BIT() macro to be much better than the BITx defines
Why? I don't think it was invented by edk2, so edk2 using it shouldn't be held against the format. :) > header files become a mix of BIT() and more than one bit shifted by x > bits, which i find inconsistent and try to avoid. I don't mind those being "inconsistent" because they represent two different things; one is a single bit value, the other a multibit value. There could of course be a multibit macro, but the benefit diminishes because the macro is neither shorter nor simpler than the expansion. //Peter _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
