Steven Dake wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 18:11 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Ryan O'Hara wrote:
>> > This patch is correct, but what I intended was to use sizeof (struct
>> > resource_instance). Can we do that instead?
>>
>> Please try to move to "sizeof (VARIABLE)".
>
> I really don't prefer this because people __often__ make the error of
> not dereferencing a pointer type. This happens more often then a
> structure completely changes on the variable the sizeof should operate
> on. These sorts of errors are extremely difficult to notice as well.
Whichever way you do it, there's risk of getting it wrong.
It's mainly a question of getting used to an idiom and
knowing what to watch out for:
For example, I know right away that these are correct,
assuming that they compile (i.e., no context required):
p = malloc (sizeof *p);
...
new_q = realloc (q, sizeof *p);
On the other hand, if I use explicit type names,
p = malloc (sizeof (struct foo));
...
new_q = realloc (q, sizeof (struct foo *));
Then I have to find each declaration and ensure that the type matches.
If I audit the code for this and find two or more errors,
would you consider a change of policy?
_______________________________________________
Openais mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
