Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268567AbTGLWR0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:17:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268577AbTGLWR0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:17:26 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:26756 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268567AbTGLWRY (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2003 18:17:24 -0400 Message-Id: <200307121840.h6CIeKIj004212@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> To: Alan Stern Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Style question: Should one check for NULL pointers? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 11 Jul 2003 11:16:02 -0400." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.1; nmh 1.0.4; XEmacs 21.4 Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 14:40:20 -0400 From: Horst von Brand Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 847 Lines: 26 Alan Stern said: [...] > But if you look very far through the kernel sources you will see many > occurrences of code similar to this: > > static void release(struct xxx *ptr) > { > if (!ptr) > return; > ... > > I can't see any reason for keeping something like that. Just like free(3) -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/