On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 02:52:11PM -0600, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> code clean up are not without risk and with no regression test suite to
> verify
> that a "cleanup" has not broken something. Cleanups are very much a
> hindrance to stabilization. With no know working points in a code
> history it becomes difficult
> to bisect changes and figure out when bugs were introduced
> Especially when cleanups are mixed in with bug fixes.
>
> Pretty code does not equal correct code.
No, but convoluted and unreadable code ends up being crappier due
to lack of review. And that's aside of the memory footprint,
likeliness of bugs introduced by code modifications (having in-core
and on-disk data structures with different contents and the same C
type => trouble that won't be caught by compiler), etc.
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
