Re: [PATCH] commit-slab: clarify slabname##_peek()'s return value

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

 



Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> But that would get a bit awkward, because peek() returns a pointer, not
> a value (as it should, because the type we're storing may be a compound
> type, which we generally avoid passing or returning by value).  So we'd
> actually need to return a pointer to a zero-initialized dummy value. Not
> impossible, but getting a bit odd.

Do we have a guarantee that callers of the peek only look at, never
touch, the location?  As long as we make it return a "const *", it
might be OK, but a quick look at commit-slab.h tells me that we do
not say "const".



[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