netdev - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] [Net] Support accelerated network plugin modules

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: <200706151421.01608.mb@bu3sch.de>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:21:01 +0200
From:	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
To:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@...cam.ac.uk>
Cc:	Kieran Mansley <kmansley@...arflare.com>,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] [Net] Support accelerated network plugin modules

On Friday 15 June 2007 14:20:34 Keir Fraser wrote:
> 
> On 15/6/07 13:11, "Michael Buesch" <mb@...sch.de> wrote:
> 
> >> No use of the following please:
> >> If (foo) return 1; else return 0;
> >> Is clearer as:
> >> Return foo;
> > 
> > But it's not the same.
> > return !!foo;
> > would be the same. And yes, it does matter:
> 
> True in general, but not the cases I've seen in this patchset, where 'foo'
> is a predicate.

Ok, if foo is a variable containing an error code, it's
better to return that error code. I assumed that foo is a
variable containing some value (counter or something).

-- 
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html