On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 21:55:10 +0100
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >> The label “out” was used to jump to a source code place after some
> >> failure cases. This implementation detail hindered better exception handling.
> > "out" is a perfectly fine name.
>
> I got the impression that this identifier can occasionally trigger
> undesirable side effects.
>
No it doesn't.
>
> >> Use more appropriate labels instead.
> >>
> >> * Reorder jump targets at the end.
> > Why?
>
>
> Resources should be released in the opposite order as they were allocated.
That's a preference not a mandate.
>
>
> >> * Delete a condition check.
> > Why?
>
> Such extra code can be avoided.
So what?
>
>
> >> * Omit an extra initialisation (for the variable “fd”)
> >> which became unnecessary with this change.
> >>
> >> Fixes: f7951864c7766ba3d683e8676fe0e497991796b2 ("libtracefs: Unit tests for tracing options APIs")
> > What was fixed???
>
> The exception handling was improved, wasn't it?
No it wasn't.
>
>
> >> +++ b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
> > This is a test file. It's run in tests.
>
> I propose to enhance it a bit.
It's not enhanced at all. It's just changing to different personal
preferences and does not improve the code one iota!
-- Steve
|