> I still don't think this should be done for any random function that > performs a null test on its argument. The corrections involved here are > not as trivial as they would seem.
I would prefer to make the list of corresponding function names more complete. > Often it is not the case that the null test at the call site should be > just deleted, instead the code should be reorganized. Which source code places do you know where a different approach might look better? > (Personally, I don't like the whole null test removal idea. [...] Would you like to clarify involved software concerns a bit more? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
