Fun with NULL pointers, part 2
Fun with NULL pointers, part 2
Posted Jul 23, 2009 12:27 UTC (Thu) by ortalo (guest, #4654)In reply to: Fun with NULL pointers, part 2 by ebiederm
Parent article: Fun with NULL pointers, part 2
Don't you think a static checker could benefit from BUG_ON()-like information (or ASSERT() or whatever you want to name it) by using the given check/assumption for code analysis.
In this case, the additional line is more an annotation (like those many static checkers introduce) than source code.
As a developper you may legitimately want that such annotations be placed elsewhere than in the middle of code, but then where would you like to place them?
In this case, the additional line is more an annotation (like those many static checkers introduce) than source code.
As a developper you may legitimately want that such annotations be placed elsewhere than in the middle of code, but then where would you like to place them?
Side note: I really do not buy the constant number_of_fault/loc assumption. But well... that's another debate; and anyway IMHO your argument with respect to code readability and maintanability is totally valid.