Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 15:52:43 -0500 | From | Eli Carter <> | Subject | Re: Style question: Should one check for NULL pointers? |
| |
Alan Stern wrote: [snip] > Ultimately this comes down to a question of style and taste. This > particular issue is not addressed in Documentation/CodingStyle so I'm > raising it here. My personal preference is for code that means what it > says; if a pointer is checked it should be because there is a genuine > possibility that the pointer _is_ NULL. I see no reason for pure > paranoia, particularly if it's not commented as such. > > Comments, anyone?
BUG_ON() perhaps?
Eli --------------------. "If it ain't broke now, Eli Carter \ it will be soon." -- crypto-gram eli.carter(a)inet.com `-------------------------------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |