Re: A CodingStyle suggestion

[Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>]

Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 11:56:16PM +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
>   
>> Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In CodingStyle Chapter 16 "Function return value and names", why not
>>> adding a comment about the favorable community way of checking the return
>>> value. ie:
>>>
>>> ret = do_method();
>>> if (ret) {
>>>   /* deal with error */
>>> }
>>>
>>> and not other ways like:
>>>
>>> if (do_method()) or 
>>>       
>> So:
>>
>> if (is_true()) {
>> 	/* do something */
>> }
>>
>> is alright then? If so, I agree, but please make it real clear in the 
>> document ;)
>>     
>
> Good catch :). A small grep of `access_ok' reveals that it's always used in the 
> form of:
> if (!access_ok()) { .. }
>
> I can conclude that verbal/imperative methods like `kmalloc, add_work' be 
> checked as:
> ret = do_work();
> if (ret) { ... }
> and predicate methods like `acess_ok, pci_dev_present' be checked like:
> if (!access_ok) { ... }
> if (pci_dev_present) { ...}
>
> Any comments ?
>   
Not really, I agree on this :)

Richard Knutsson