Message-ID: <488104C9.6080108@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:02:01 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080614 SeaMonkey/1.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Soumyadip Das Mahapatra <soumya.linux@yahoo.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Surprising Code In sound/core/pcm_native.c In Recent Git Tree
References: <416584.18514.qm@web59516.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <416584.18514.qm@web59516.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1041
Lines: 28

Soumyadip Das Mahapatra wrote:
> When i was reading the code in sound/core/pcm_native.c in
> recent git tree, i got stuck in  line no 3258. It is something
> like this
> snd_assert(substream != NULL, goto out);
> 
> That (goto statement) surprised me for a while unless i came to
> know snd_assert() is a macro (as expected!). Previous version
> too had a return statement in it.
> 
> The point is that can we have a nicer code? Because this type
> of code is sometimes __CONFUSING__.

Curious.  The "goto out", "return -EIO" and friends are not compiled in 
if CONFIG_SND_DEBUG is not set.

Why would anybody want a debug macro to exit from functions?

BTW, grep tells me there are 829 occurrences of snd_assert in linux 2.6.26.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- -=== =--=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/