lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: A CodingStyle suggestion
    From
    On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 11:56:16PM +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
    > Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
    > >Hi all,
    > >
    > >In CodingStyle Chapter 16 "Function return value and names", why not
    > >adding a comment about the favorable community way of checking the return
    > >value. ie:
    > >
    > >ret = do_method();
    > >if (ret) {
    > > /* deal with error */
    > >}
    > >
    > >and not other ways like:
    > >
    > >if (do_method()) or
    > So:
    >
    > if (is_true()) {
    > /* do something */
    > }
    >
    > is alright then? If so, I agree, but please make it real clear in the
    > document ;)

    Good catch :). A small grep of `access_ok' reveals that it's always used in the
    form of:
    if (!access_ok()) { .. }

    I can conclude that verbal/imperative methods like `kmalloc, add_work' be
    checked as:
    ret = do_work();
    if (ret) { ... }
    and predicate methods like `acess_ok, pci_dev_present' be checked like:
    if (!access_ok) { ... }
    if (pci_dev_present) { ...}

    Any comments ?

    --
    Ahmed S. Darwish
    http://darwish-07.blogspot.com
    -
    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: 2007-02-04 01:09    [W:0.034 / U:1.312 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site