Re: [PATCH 1/3] vcs-svn: rename check_overflow arguments for clarity

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dmitry Ivankov wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Code using the argument names a and b just doesn't look right (not
>>> sure why!).  Use more explicit names "offset" and "len" to make their
>>> type and function clearer.
>>
>> Well, it's still not clear. Given off_t a, size_t b, check that a+b
>> fits into type... which type?
>> "offset" and "length" don't imply that it's "type of offset" or maybe
>> "type of length".
>
> Hmm... in vector arithmetic, position (i.e., file offset) + displacement
> (i.e., size of chunk) = position (i.e., new file offset).  Any ideas
> for making this clearer?

Maybe rename to check_offset_overflow to make it explicit?
--
David Barr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]