lkml.org 
[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*?
    From
    Date
    On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 17:22, Rob Wilkens wrote:

    > I say "please don't use goto" and instead have a "cleanup_lock" function
    > and add that before all the return statements.. It should not be a
    > burden. Yes, it's asking the developer to work a little harder, but the
    > end result is better code.

    No, it is gross and it bloats the kernel. It inlines a bunch of junk
    for N error paths, as opposed to having the exit code once at the end.
    Cache footprint is key and you just killed it.

    Nor is it easier to read.

    As a final argument, it does not let us cleanly do the usual stack-esque
    wind and unwind, i.e.

    do A
    if (error)
    goto out_a;
    do B
    if (error)
    goto out_b;
    do C
    if (error)
    goto out_c;
    goto out;
    out_c:
    undo C
    out_b:
    undo B:
    out_a:
    undo A
    out:
    return ret;

    Now stop this.

    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: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.022 / U:179.600 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site