It's defensive programming so you don't depend on the callers zero-initalizing their input.
Best regards, Alex Ionescu On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Aleksey Bragin <[email protected]> wrote: > It's done to zero-initialize all what was provided and only then check if > enough params were provided. We usually use same approach in other kernel > functions (zero init all what's possible, then perform more complex > validation and fail if validation fails). > > I'm not sure whether that's so useful there, because if the caller gets > non-successful status, he shouldn't be using these parameters anyway. > > WBR, > Aleksey Bragin. > > > On 07.12.2011 21:59, Ged Murphy wrote: > >> Quick typo, your param checks in LdrpCheckForKnownDll come after your >> initialization >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:ros-diffs-bounces@** >> reactos.org <[email protected]>] On Behalf Of >> [email protected] >> Sent: 07 December 2011 17:51 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [ros-diffs] [fireball] 54606: [NTDLL/LDR] - Improve >> LdrpCheckForKnownDll by adding parameters validation, return status value, >> better failure paths handling. >> >> Author: fireball >> Date: Wed Dec 7 17:51:18 2011 >> New Revision: 54606 >> >> URL: >> http://svn.reactos.org/svn/**reactos?rev=54606&view=rev<http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=54606&view=rev> >> Log: >> [NTDLL/LDR] >> - Improve LdrpCheckForKnownDll by adding parameters validation, return >> status value, better failure paths handling. >> >> Modified: >> trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/**include/ntdllp.h >> trunk/reactos/dll/ntdll/ldr/**ldrutils.c >> >> >> > > ______________________________**_________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.reactos.org/**mailman/listinfo/ros-dev<http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev> >
_______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
