[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Style question: Should one check for NULL pointers?
Followup to:  <>
By author: Eli Carter <>
In newsgroup:
> Alan Stern wrote:
> [snip]
> > Ultimately this comes down to a question of style and taste. This
> > particular issue is not addressed in Documentation/CodingStyle so I'm
> > raising it here. My personal preference is for code that means what it
> > says; if a pointer is checked it should be because there is a genuine
> > possibility that the pointer _is_ NULL. I see no reason for pure
> > paranoia, particularly if it's not commented as such.
> >
> > Comments, anyone?
> BUG_ON() perhaps?

BUG_ON() is largely redundant if you would have a null pointer
reference anyway.

<> at work, <> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean