Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751964AbaLCQBJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:01:09 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:55572 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751322AbaLCQBH (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:01:07 -0500 Message-ID: <547F33AC.50002@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 17:00:44 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arend van Spriel CC: Dan Carpenter , Julia Lawall , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , OGAWA Hirofumi , Coccinelle , backports@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Berg , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [patch] CodingStyle: add some more error handling guidelines References: <20141202085950.GA13434@mwanda> <547F0297.6030202@users.sourceforge.net> <20141203124511.GR5048@mwanda> <547F0977.7090908@users.sourceforge.net> <20141203132002.GT5048@mwanda> <547F0F2A.3060708@users.sourceforge.net> <547F1942.5060502@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: <547F1942.5060502@broadcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:a3KXUwfNusSYGa4+WA1GSWoXAuJ7y0/3XFrBNealyxzn+6vuiFn cWpGGjXvoBTHJ1lgV4ZM7GQdPyPcpglm9VPYavF0+AfA+bBHCy/5FlFBsuy4mqm0wIgiJMa QRNI+7vfCr/CuC8ydChmop07yHCSL6v1sc9tRedXfYHfYCa04hZlQgTu5Yo/fMUAIB4E4MT IxfGzJb649/T3CvlXXjiw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Which name pattern do you find more appropriate in such >> an use case? > > I think Dan wants the label to be descriptive about the tasks > needed in the exception handling itself. I would usually prefer also such a target-oriented labelling for the affected identifiers. How are the chances to express an expectation in this direction unambiguously for the proposed coding style update? > This makes sense as the exception handling steps may be reused > for different failures in the code. I would stress a different reason from my point of view. Regards, Markus -- 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/