> Any strong reason why not? x has some value that does not
> make sense and can create only problems.
By the same logic, you should memset the buffer to zero before freeing it too.
> And as I explained, it can result in longer code too. So, why
> keep this value around. Why not re-initialize it to NULL.
Because initialization increases code size.
It's a silly patch.
> If x should not be re-initialized to NULL, then by the same
> logic, we should not even initialize local variables. And all
> of us know that local variables should be initialized.
>
> I would like to know a good reason as to why x should not be
> set to NULL.
-
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]
