"Gujulan Elango, Hari Prasath (H.)" <hgujulan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 03:19:34PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 08:03:06AM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote: >> > "Gujulan Elango, Hari Prasath (H.)" <hgujulan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > > Remove the goto and return error directly thereby removing a variable >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Hari Prasath Gujulan Elango <hgujulan@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > --- >> > > drivers/staging/rtl8723au/os_dep/ioctl_cfg80211.c | 7 ++----- >> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> > >> > NACK! >> >> SHOUTING! >> >> > >> > The goto is cleaner and more consistent, rather than hiding a return in >> > the middle of the code. >> >> More consistent with what? There are already returns earlier in the >> function. Do-nothing gotos are pointless and annoying. >> >> regards, >> dan carpenter >> > > I sent this patch because goto & return was mixed up in this function. > There was a return as well as goto used. And i guess goto is not > encouraged anywhere. In this case especially,I couldn't see any > significant cleanup being done in the goto label. I will accept a patch to remove the returns in the middle of the function, if you wish to submit that. A return at the very beginning of a function is OK, but in the middle of a larger function they make it harder to catch when code exists. Jes _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
