lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), )
From
Date
On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 11:06 +0100, Russell King wrote:

> +The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following:
> +
> + p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...);
> +
> +The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and
> +introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed
> +but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not.

Agreed.

Also, after Alan's #4:

5. Contrary to the above statement, such coding style does not help,
but in fact hurts, readability. How on Earth is sizeof(*p) more
readable and information-rich than sizeof(struct foo)? It looks
like the remains of a 5,000 year old wolverine's spleen and
conveys no information about the type of the object that is being
created.

Robert Love


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-09-18 18:35    [W:0.592 / U:1.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site