Re: [patch] remove null-ifiers

[Nate Lawson <nate-Y6VGUYTwhu0@public.gmane.org>]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> >>>>> "John" == John Belmonte <john-wanGne27zNesTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
> John> Jes Sorensen wrote:
> >> We definately want to do this, this *is* how it works within the
> >> kernel.
>
> John> That may be the case, but in the process I think you are
> John> destroying vital information about which variables the code
> John> depends on being initialized to zero.  If the Linux kernel ever
> John> changed its policy, or if the code was used in something other
> John> than the Linux kernel (perhaps even being translated to some other
> John> computer language), you would need that information again.
>
> Not at all, it's standard Linux kernel convention, it won't
> change. Explicitly zeroing out variables cause more damage since it
> transfers them to the data segment from the bss segment.
>
> John> I suggest commenting out the assignment instead of deleting it:
>
> John>      static int foo /*= 0*/;
>
> It works, IMHO it's ugly, but if you find it helps, go ahead. I'd rather
> leave a comment like /* uninitialized global variables automatically go
> to the bss and get zeroed out */

I think you should have spelled that as:
/* http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html */

If you're translating code to another language, it's a good idea to know
how to use the original language.  This is not a Linux convention, it's
part of the K&R and ANSI standards for C and has been around at least 20
years, probably 30.

-Nate


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn