| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 18:48, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 15:02, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 03:38:23PM +0800, Franco Broi wrote: > > > > I see. It's because the error code is set before the test for the > > actual error condition. I see this all over to ogfs code and I > > think it's a very bad idea because you have to keep the current > > contents of the return value in mind for the rest of the function. > > I'll commit a fix. > > I have seen it at many places. I found it useful when most of the check > will return the same error and when success you explicitly say ret=0 > > ie > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > ret= my_func1() > if(ret) > goto out; But you've changed ret, so there was no point setting it to -ENOMEM!! It makes more sense if you say: ret = -ENOMEM; if(my_func1() < 0) goto out; > ret = my_func2() > if(ret) > goto out > ret = 0; > > out: > return ret; > > -aneesh > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara > The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions > www.enterpriselinuxforum.com > > _______________________________________________ > Opengfs-devel mailing list > Opengfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengfs-devel ------------------------------------------------------- Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions www.enterpriselinuxforum.com _______________________________________________ Opengfs-devel mailing list Opengfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengfs-devel