On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Jeff Haran wrote: > ... > > I disagree. By having "return false" (or "return 0", "return -1" and so > > on) instead of "goto err" it is not immediately apparent to someone who > > studies/reviews/uses the code that this is an error condition/path. I > > have been in that situation many times when I have to go back and look > > at a particular function call to see what "return false" or "return 0" > > actually means. > > > > By including "goto err" instead of multiple "return false" statement, > > that makes it instantly obvious what the purpose of that statement is > > without having to look elsewhere. > > I suppose as an alternative you could go way against the usual practice > and put some text in a function header comment block indicating what the > return code means. I know it doesn't get used much but C has had this /* > comment */ thing for a long time. I've never understood why more people > don't use it. In general I'd agree with you, but this is a boolean function. So why should the the meaning of the return value "true" and "false" be explained? (This is also why I regard the goto unnecessary.) Best regards, Jozsef - E-mail : kadlec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kadlecsik.jozsef@xxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP key : http://www.kfki.hu/~kadlec/pgp_public_key.txt Address : Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences H-1525 Budapest 114, POB. 49, Hungary -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
