Re: [PATCH v5 0/25] Generic Red-Black Trees (still WIP)

2012-09-25 Thread Daniel Santos
Hmm, looks like I've had some type of mailer problem as this message didn't appear on LKML :( I hope this one goes through, but sorry my patches aren't properly grouped. On 09/25/2012 06:24 PM, Daniel Santos wrote: > First I want to apologize for not being able to work on this over most of the >

Re: [PATCH v5 0/25] Generic Red-Black Trees (still WIP)

2012-09-25 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:02 -0500, Daniel Santos wrote: > >> Q&A > >> === > >> Q: Why did you add BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST() and > >>BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST42()? > > A: Because BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST42() will crash if it does not result > > in the answer to life, the universe and everything! > >

Re: [PATCH v5 0/25] Generic Red-Black Trees (still WIP)

2012-09-25 Thread Daniel Santos
>> Q&A >> === >> Q: Why did you add BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST() and >>BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST42()? > A: Because BUILD_BUG_ON_NON_CONST42() will crash if it does not result > in the answer to life, the universe and everything! By the way, I have a theory before time, God was writing code on some c