[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA-cvs: pcb.git: branch: master updated (dbf835c02cda1d16157a83f8c1b9b1da2a05400a)
On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 06:21 +0000, git@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> ConnectionTypePtr conn;
>
> + /* It would be worth checking if SourceNet is NULL here to avoid a segfault. Seb James. */
> CONNECTION_LOOP (SourceNet);
> {
> conn = GetConnectionMemory (DestNet);
I'd rather not see comments like this added. If it is worth testing..
make a patch and add the test. Especially if the result could be a
segfault. In general, I object to sprinkling checks unnecessarily.. can
SourceNet ever be null at this point?
An assert() might make the assumption clear, a test avoids fixes the
problem (or is overly paranoid), but the comment adds nothing useful.
As a style point, if one "must" add such comments, prefix with "FIXME: "
or "XXX:", as these are picked up by many editors, and can easily be
searched for if anyone is in the mood to review such things.
Generally, I tend to prefer not to see people's names added to comments
in the code. It might put people off editing things if they think a
particular piece of code "belongs" to someone.
git log / git blame etc.. provide powerful tools to investigate the
origin of code lines - if people need to know.
--
Peter Clifton
Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge,
9, JJ Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge
CB3 0FA
Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!)
Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me)
_______________________________________________
geda-cvs mailing list
geda-cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-cvs