![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:53:42AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On 9/18/05, Robert Love <rml@novell.com> wrote: > > 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. > > Yes it does. The semantics are clearly "I want enough memory to hold > the type this pointer points to." While sizeof(struct foo) might seem > more readable, it is in fact not as you have no way of knowing whether > the allocation is correct or not by looking at the line. So for > spotting allocation errors with grep, the shorter form is better (and > arguably less error-prone). Huh??? How do you use grep to find something of that sort? - 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: 2005-09-20 09:43 [W:1.619 / U:0.090 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||