Message105759
One other note: I find the bit numbering in find_last_set_bit peculiar: isn't the least significant bit usually bit 0? (Well, okay some people number the msb 0, but that's just weird. :) I know the ffs and fls functions also start their bit numbering at one, but this seems very unconventional to me.
Perhaps rename find_last_set_bit to bit_length? i.e., it's the *size* of the small bitfield that can contain the given value, rather than the index of the highest bit in that bitfield. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-05-14 20:32:58 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, rhettinger, belopolsky, draghuram, stutzbach |
2010-05-14 20:32:58 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1273869178.67.0.282969997619.issue8692@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-05-14 20:32:56 | mark.dickinson | link | issue8692 messages |
2010-05-14 20:32:56 | mark.dickinson | create | |
|