On 09/28/2018 04:08 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: > Yes, but the next developer who adds a function which returns jboolean > and looks at your implementation could easily introduce new, buggy > code like the one you fixed (because from a C-perspective that makes > no difference). But if he sees that other JNI functions all return > exclusively JNI_TRUE/JNI_FALSE he may be inclined to do so as well.
I'm not convinced that it'll make such mistakes much less likely, and I do not believe that making code so ugly and verbose is sensible. Also, I do no believe that we should introduce dead code. And this absolutely is dead code. -- Andrew Haley Java Platform Lead Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
