[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?
On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 05:34:58PM -0500, Rob Wilkens wrote:
> You're wrong. You wouldn't have to jump over them any more than you
> have to jump over the "goto" statement.

The goto is a conditional jump. You propose replacing it with a
conditional jump past the error handling code predicated on the
opposite condition. Where's the improvement?

> > any instructions, and you end up with a kernel which has much more
> > duplicated code and thus thrashes the cache more. It also makes the
> If that argument was taken to it's logical conclusion (and I did, in my
> mind just now), no one should add any code the grows the kernel at all.

Not without good reason.
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 13:32    [W:0.141 / U:2.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site