W dniu 27.07.2011 13:37, Florian Forster pisze:
Hi Colin,
thank you very much for your patch!
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:00:07PM -0700, Colin McCabe wrote:
- char values[512];
+ char *values = NULL;
Why don't use stick with stack memory here? Allocating a (fixed sized)
junk on the heap only means that you'll have to free it again.
Maybe the buffer could be resized if it's too small? That would be a
benefit of a heap allocation (not done in the patch AFAICS).
- return (-1);
+ goto fail;
Sorry, but "goto" is a no-go for collectd. You can use something like
"do { … } while (0);" if you must, but in this particular case I think
simply using stack memory is the way to go.
Is using goto to clean up and return considered evil too? ;) It's well
established and preferred e.g. in Linux kernel code. I'd say it's a
reasonable approximation of a try/finally block from other languages.
Best regards,
Grzegorz Nosek
BTW, should I resend my network plugin patches or have you seen them and
deemed bad for any reason?
_______________________________________________
collectd mailing list
collectd@verplant.org
http://mailman.verplant.org/listinfo/collectd
