lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: A CodingStyle suggestion
FromRoland Dreier <>
DateSat, 03 Feb 2007 16:21:18 -0800
 > 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 ?

I don't think that's really the distinction that matters.  I think
really the issue is that assignment within an if is hard to read, so

	ret = foo(a, b);
        if (ret) { ... }
is clearly preferred to

	if ((ret = foo(a,b))) { ... }
However, in my opinion something like

	if (foo(a,b)) { ... }
if perfectly fine if the return value of foo is not needed anywhere
else.  In other words, there's no sense introducing a temporary
variable to hold the return value if you're never going to do anything
with it other than check it on the next line.

 - R.
-
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 01:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2008