>> On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 07:58:55PM -0500, Joseph D. Wagner wrote:
>> SUBJECT: Good Idea (tm): Code Consolidation for Functions and Macros
>> that Access the Process Address Space
>>...
>> Remember, if a function call has no place for a returned value to go,
>> nothing bad happens; the returned value is simply ignored/discarded.
> And the compiler warning?
See WHY THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED #3 "Forces better coding structures and
procedures..." Frankly, error controls should have been programmed into
the code anyway. It's just good programming practice.
>> SOLUTION:
> Get rid of the _ret forms. Their use is frowned on today anyway
because
> they hide the real meaning of what the code is trying to do, and
hiding
> the fact that a function can return in the middle of what looks like a
> macro call is _REAL_ _BAD_.
While I respectively disagree with you, I really don't care which set of
functions/macros are eliminated for consolidation purposes. My original
point still stands that maintaining duplicate functions -- well, near
duplicate with the exception of the returned error code -- is a waste of
time, resources, and coding, and for the purpose of simplified
maintenance, one of the sets of duplicate functions/macros should be
eliminated.
Joseph Wagner
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 22:00:53 EST