Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v3] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 11:39:56 +0200,
Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2020, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 10:43:28 +0200,
> > Julia Lawall wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2020, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 08 Jul 2020 20:14:27 +0200,
> > > > Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +Recommended replacements for 'blacklist/whitelist' are:
> > > > > +    'denylist / allowlist'
> > > > > +    'blocklist / passlist'
> > > >
> > > > I started looking through the tree now and noticed there are lots of
> > > > patterns like "whitelisted" or "blacklisted".  How can the words fit
> > > > for those?  Actually, there are two cases like:
> > > >
> > > > - Foo is blacklisted
> > > > - Allow to load the non-whitelisted cards
> > > >
> > > > Currently I'm replacing the former with "Foo is in denylist", but not
> > >
> > > In the denylist?
> >
> > Not really, only the allowlist exists in this case.
> 
> I'm not sure to understand.  in denylist is not grammatical.  It needs "a"
> or "the".

Ah, now I see how I confused you.  The two cases I mentioned in the
above are completely individual.  They were found in two different
drivers.  I put those just as two distinct examples for the passive
form usages.  Sorry for unclearness.

What I meant about the latter was that "not in allowlist" doesn't mean
it being "in denylist".  It's simply unknown.


Takashi
_______________________________________________
Ksummit-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss