git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH 00/28] clean-ups of static functions and returns

From
TNtrajce nedev <trajcenedev@hotmail.com>
Date
Aug 15, 2006, 01:40 UTC
Message-ID
<BAY110-F2347BACD15C6BACC34E839B84F0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To
<7vsljyajxj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

So you're just going to continue passing numbers around in the hope that someday they'll be used for something?

Trajce Nedev
Show 50 quoted lines
>From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
>To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
>CC: git@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/28] clean-ups of static functions and returns
>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:04:24 -0700
>
>David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting.  Did you use some automated tool to spot them?
> >>
> >
> > No, these changes are from my own personal tree that optimizes 
>everything for
> > speed since I am working with terabytes of data.  I only submitted 
>changes that
> > I thought would be beneficial for your project as well.
> >
> >>  * Making stricter error checking in the future harder.  There
> >>    are three classes, but the lines between them are fuzzy.
> >>
> >>         [PATCH 04/28] builtin-diff.c cleanup
> >>...
> >>         [PATCH 23/28] makes peek_remote void
> >>
> >>    The callers of the first group check their return values, so
> >>    we could make error checking of these functions stricter in
> >>    the future without affecting the rest of the code.  The ones
> >>    that currently die() (or usage()) could be made into more
> >>    libified form to return error codes.
> >>
> >>    So I do not think it is worth doing these.
> >
> > I disagree.  Having static functions return ints that are the
> > same for _every_ code path and are checked against upon return
> > is never good style.  It implies that error checking is
> > already done and the return value is of importance.
>
>I would agree with your above statement about the second group,
>but not the ones listed in the first group, whose callers are
>prepared to receive error returns.  It just happens that these
>callees do not currently detect errors, but some of them
>certainly could be improved to return errors, instead of just
>calling die().
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

Previous: Junio C HamanoNext: Junio C Hamano
Message 9 of 10 in “clean-ups of static functions and returns”
  1. 00/28 clean-ups of static functions and returnsDavid Rientjes, Aug 14, 2006
  2. Jakub NarebskiAug 14, 2006
  3. David RientjesAug 14, 2006
  4. Johannes SchindelinAug 14, 2006
  5. Jakub NarebskiAug 14, 2006
  6. Junio C HamanoAug 14, 2006
  7. David RientjesAug 14, 2006
  8. Junio C HamanoAug 15, 2006
  9. trajce nedevAug 15, 2006
  10. Junio C HamanoAug 15, 2006

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.