On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 02:35:27PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> Surely there's general agreement on using REG_P etc? I don't see anyone
No objections from me for using REG_P and other *_P macros more.
> objecting to it, and that's all the patchset does: to avoid any
> confusion the second half of the email asking about opinions on is_a is
> entirely independent from the first half describing the existing patchset.
My comment was mainly targetted at the ->is_a stuff, but also a general
comment that having something written in some wiki doesn't mean there is
agreement on it.
Jakub
