Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- From: Robin Getz <rgetz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:38:23 -0400
On Fri 27 Jul 2007 06:18, Yoann Padioleau pondered:
David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Yoann Padioleau <padator@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:0.
When comparing a pointer, it's clearer to compare it to NULL than to
Can you make them of style:
if (!x)
Yes I can. I can make another semantic patch later to do that
transformation. But some people may prefer (x == NULL) to (!x)
so I don't know. I think that transformation
some 0 to NULL is less controversial.
instead?
If there is a definite style or semantic preference that everyone should live
with - does it make sense to put checks in checkpatch.pl to enforce it?
-Robin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- From: Mike Frysinger
- Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- References:
- [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- From: Yoann Padioleau
- Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- From: David Howells
- Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- From: Yoann Padioleau
- [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- Prev by Date: [rfc] direct IO submission and completion scalability issues
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
