[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 23/35] Increase x86 interrupt vector range

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 13 May 2006, at 18:44, Chuck Ebbert wrote:

> AFAIC this could go in anytime.  It's simple, self-contained and makes
> sense even without Xen.
>
> One minor nit: the IRQ value isn't negated, it's complemented.  The
> comments need to be fixed.
If we really want it disambiguated then we should call it something 
like 'bitwise-negated' or 'ones-complemented'. 'Complemented' alone is 
worse than 'negated' imo, since negation is at least the usual name for 
the tilde operator in C while complementation is an ambiguous term 
unless you know the base/radix.
 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel