From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/11] eal: replace rte_panic instances in ethdev Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:56:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2727458.a5P0WfqTky@xps> References: <1524117669-25729-1-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Burakov, Anatoly" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Doherty, Declan" , jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, Bruce Richardson , "Yigit, Ferruh" To: Arnon Warshavsky , Kevin Traynor Return-path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F87F7EE4 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:56:59 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 20/04/2018 15:23, Arnon Warshavsky: > > > > Lots of "!= 0"'s - you might gather by now that I don't like them :-) > > > > No way. Would have never guessed that :) > Sure. When in Rome.. It is a matter of taste. I like the explicit "!= 0". At least, explicit NULL comparisons are recommended in the coding style: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html#null-pointers For boolean return, it is OK to be implicit. But for error codes, I think it is better to be explicit. Again, matter of taste. By the way, looking at "git grep 'if (rte_'" suggests it is common.