From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266639AbUGKUGX (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:06:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266640AbUGKUGX (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:06:23 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([63.209.29.2]:29833 "EHLO hera.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266639AbUGKUGV (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:06:21 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use NULL instead of integer 0 in security/selinux/ Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 20:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: References: <20040707122525.X1924@build.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: terminus.zytor.com 1089576354 11531 127.0.0.1 (11 Jul 2004 20:05:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@terminus.zytor.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 20:05:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: By author: Geert Uytterhoeven In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > - `return f();' in a function returning void (where f() returns void as well) > Considering this one a bug is daft in the extreme. Why? Because "return f();" is the only kind of tailcall syntax C has, and requiring that "void" functions use a different syntax is just stupid. Now, if the return types don't match then that's another issue. -hpa