28 Jan
2006
28 Jan
'06
7:49 a.m.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:21:22 -0600
James Hawkins <truiken(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Nobody's saying 'oh noes ... we must toss all code with gotos'.
These are metrics for functions that we must consider as needing
more than cursory examination. I was trying to set some
boundaries for clearly in and clearly out that can be measured
in a somewhat objective way.
To me, using more than two or three goto targets per function is
excessive. Goto targets for cleanup and generic error handling
are pretty common in C code, but I believe that code which uses
more than a handful of gotos should at least be examined in
detail.
--
Here's a simple experiment. Stand on a train track between two
locomotives which are pushing on you with equal force in opposite
directions. You will exhibit no net motion. None the less, you may
soon begin to notice that something important is happening.
-- Robert Stirniman
On 1/28/06, Steven Edwards
<winehacker(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, that appears 4 lines later in the original.
Hello,
Ok here are some proposed ground rules for the audit. Mostly thanks to
Art and Alex. We are still open for debate on this
...
1. A function is deemed to have been implemented
in a non-clean manner if
- functions for which there is NO DOCUMENTATION
I think this condition isn't always evidence of a non-clean
implementation of a function. A developer might have written tests
for a function and not committed them back to ReactOS. This could be
rewritten as:
"If a function has NO DOCUMENTATION and no test cases exist either in
ReactOS or elsewhere, then test cases must be submitted to ReactOS."
- functions
with excessive gotos
This case is similar to the documentation case in that it's not direct
evidence of a non-clean implementation. I frequently use gotos for
releasing many resources in error cases as a way of factoring code. A
better wording would be:
"Functions with excessive gotos should be marked for further inspection."
--
James Hawkins