On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 11:06 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> +The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following:
> +
> + p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...);
> +
> +The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and
> +introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed
> +but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not.
Agreed.
Also, after Alan's #4:
5. Contrary to the above statement, such coding style does not help,
but in fact hurts, readability. How on Earth is sizeof(*p) more
readable and information-rich than sizeof(struct foo)? It looks
like the remains of a 5,000 year old wolverine's spleen and
conveys no information about the type of the object that is being
created.
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|