Re: [RFC PATCH] explicitly mark recursion count

[Jörn Engel]

On Wed, 2 June 2004 20:37:20 +0100, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:58:32PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > Note the "in the most general case" part.  You can get things right if
> > you make some assumptions and those assumptions are actually valid.
> > In my case the assumptions are:
> > 1. all relevant function pointers are stuffed into some struct and
> 
> Wrong.  They are often passed as arguments to generic helpers, without
> being ever put into any structures.

Ok.  Would it be ok to use the following then?

b1. Function pointer are passed as arguments to functions and
b2. those pointer are called directly from the function, they are
    passed to.

Either that or the previous two rules, renamed to a1 and a2.

(Note that I care more about sane rules than what any random code in
some dark corner happens to do right now.)

Jörn

-- 
A surrounded army must be given a way out.
-- Sun Tzu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/