linux-kernel - Re: A style question: repeated return value check

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c62985530809300148n585327b3w8290b7761063fbd7@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:48:04 +0200
From:	"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Pekka Paalanen" <pq@....fi>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: A style question: repeated return value check

2008/9/30 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
> in this particular case it's marginally worse style i think, even
> considering that it makes the code more compact. The reason is that it
> makes the code a tiny bit less obvious: the flow looks a bit unusual and
> when skimming it i'd have to look once more to understand its purpose.
> With the returns its more verbose but also plain obvious. YMMV.

I think the same. The code flow seems to me more natural as is even if
it looks more
noisy.
IMHO, when one is reading the code, such a compact path forces a break
to figure out
what is going on in these tests.

But I agree with Pekka for the fact that it could be unified in a
single call to trace_seq_printf.
That will produce a small "3 format" easy to understand. Seems good.
--
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/