From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Remove some usage of shadow variable
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:44:21 +0100
Message-ID: <563098F5.3060709@suse.com>
References: <1445960359-17217-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@citrix.com>
	<562FAE5002000078000AF3C2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<CAFLBxZaEQCBZ0txfj+3Ji=jCa+atV-j1S-X_t9vqA0Rg6pk0UA@mail.gmail.com>
	<56309AFF02000078000AF718@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<56309174.8010608@suse.com>
	<5630A40302000078000AF75C@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <jgross@suse.com>) id 1ZrNW9-0002a4-Nz
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:59:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <5630A40302000078000AF75C@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: KeirFraser <keir@xen.org>, IanCampbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 10/28/2015 10:31 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.10.15 at 10:12, <JGross@suse.com> wrote:
>> On 10/28/2015 09:53 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> And second variables
>>> whose name is kind of natural (e.g. "d" for struct domain * instances)
>>> but which are intentionally shadowing a larger scope one in order to
>>> not clobber that one's value.
>>
>> Hmm, wouldn't something like tmp_d or d_tmp be a proper solution?
>
> Ugly. Really ugly.

Maybe. OTOH I'm quite sure there is a name which would be acceptable.
Otherwise we couldn't write code referencing two different domains via
local variables without making it ugly.

>> There are other cases where more than one domain reference are needed
>> and it was possible to find proper variable names.
>
> Yes, resulting in e.g. "e" being used for a struct domain * in grant
> table code. Very natural a name for this kind of object.

Bad examples are always possible. This is no excuse not to use compiler
features which help us to avoid bugs.


Juergen