On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 09:12:44PM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote: > > Op 18-05-2026 19:13 CEST schreef Mark Brown : > > Figured it'd be an arch specific version of a similar thing - I didn't > > audit them as you can see. > These confusions with octal numbers in lists that aren't even ordered is > why I would prefer to use shifted values instead. I don't see any reason > actually why we should not just convert them all, apart from churning and > perhaps not doing it correctly (which would be bad). My rationale for mixing > was to use 1 << n at least for the remaining bits. If I remember correctly, > this is also what Aleksa preferred. Yeah, shifted values do make sense to me as well - other than the inconsistent style the only issue I saw was that it's a bit less obvious that the values collide.