> >> VIR_FREE() would have to be done at the top of the function; otherwise,
> >> how does the caller distinguish which error occurred when -1 gets
> >> returned and whether it should VIR_FREE itself?
> >>
> > 
> > Well, I have to admin that this^^ is a fair argument because there are 3
> > different spots where the function can fail, not that the caller could not
> > check result for NULL but the fact that a function touched caller's argument
> > and then failed would be just weird. So, yeah, good point.
> > 
> I actually thought this was the "more compelling" reason, but seeing as
> there's no other feedback - I'll make the simple patch for having the
> VIR_FREE() in virReadFCHost, adjust the comments, and move on.
> John

Hi John, I think I admitted that you had a very good point (the one on top) so
I thought you would actually push your original version, I'm sorry if I wasn't
clear enough with my statement.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

libvir-list mailing list

Reply via email to