Re: [PATCH 04/15] t0003: use named parameters in attr_check()

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

 



On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 7:01 AM Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We had named the parameters in attr_check() but $2 was being used
> instead of $expect. Make all variable accesses in attr_check() use named
> variables instead of numbered arguments for clarity.
>
> While we're at it, add variable assignments to the &&-chain. These
> aren't ever expected to fail but for stylistic purposes, include them
> anyway for stylistic purposes.

As a justification, "stylistic purposes" isn't very strong. However, a
solid justification is that keeping the &&-chain intact even for these
assignments means that if someone comes along in the future and
inserts code _above_ the assignments, and if that code could fail in
some way, then the intact &&-chain will ensure that that failure is
noticed rather than going unnoticed.

> Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx>



[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]

  Powered by Linux