| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:06:24 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] shm: Remove silly double assignment * Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> wrote: > > Not silly, really. Look: > > > > err = -ENOMEM; > > if (expr1) > > goto out; > > > > err = -ENOMEM; > > if (expr2) > > goto out; > > > > each of these two units is a separate, self-contained clause. > > Removing the second assignment to `err' breaks that separation and > > will make one clause undesirably dependent upon the other. > > yes, I see that keeping the second assignment lets you insert code in > the middle without having up to update afterwards. I just don't think > the redundant assignment is worth keeping just for that purpose. cleanups is all about having familar, robust, predictable, self-contained patterns of code that are easy to recognize, easy to review and easy to keep working well. In this case we've got an admittedly boundary case: removing the technically redundant piece of code, while a valid cleanup at first sight, makes the code less robust against future changes. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists