Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:35:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:35:10 -0400 Received: from dsl-213-023-040-192.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.40.192]:45449 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:35:09 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Daniel Phillips To: Thunder from the hill Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34 Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 21:40:12 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Thunder from the hill , References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1192 Lines: 31 On Monday 16 September 2002 21:36, Thunder from the hill wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > On Monday 16 September 2002 20:35, Thunder from the hill wrote: > > > !assert(typeof((fool)->next) == typeof(fool)); > > > > You meant: > > > > assert(typeof((fool)->next) != typeof(fool)); > > No, I mean "Never assert that the one next to a fool must be a fool, > either. You might be wrong." A proper assert does not return a value, by definition. ?It relies purely on side effects, that is, it causes a screeching halt if the logical expression was false. ?It's always wrong to use an asssert in an expression, and since BUG_ON is just assert(!expression) this applies to BUG_ON as well. ?The compiler should prevent you from making this mistake. What I *thought* you meant was: "if the next fool that comes along is exactly the same as the last fool, run away screaming". ?There's some wisdom in that. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/