On Tue, 05.01.10 09:51, Colin Guthrie (gmane at colin.guthr.ie) wrote: > > Would it be generally cleaner to just allocate the "m" struct with > pa_xnew0() rather than pa_xnew()? That way neither n_waiting nor > n_waiting_for_accept need to be explicitly set. I didn't use to use pa_xnew0() for cases like this, because with pa_xnew() missing field initializations would show up immediately in valgrind, and this hence forces me to think about the proper initializations for the fields. But nowadays I tend to think differently about this and can only recommend using pa_xnew0() since for every non-trivial object you'll otherwise end up with a lot of pointless null assignments which makes the code very much unreadable and hides which initializations actually really matter. In the end code readability is more important than valgrind friendliness. Also, valgrind normally does not work on fedora rawhide anyway anymore so optimizing for valgrind use is a pointless excercise. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4
