2013/10/19 David Miller [off-list ref]:
From: Geyslan Gregório Bem <redacted>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:42:35 -0300
quoted
2013/10/19 David Miller [off-list ref]:
quoted
From: "Geyslan G. Bem" <redacted>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 10:09:31 -0300
quoted
This patch moves the '!err' condition into the above else scope,
what is more obvious and has the secondary goal of avoid false-positives
in statical analyze tools.
Signed-off-by: Geyslan G. Bem <redacted>
I do not think patches should be applied to satisfy tools if the
code is semantically correct.
Yes, Miller, I agree. But as I mentioned:
".. and has as the 'secondary' goal of avoid false-positives in
statical analyze tools."
The 'primary' goal is to not repeat a condition test:
"This patch moves the '!err' condition into the above else scope, what
is more obvious ..."
I still do not feel that this change is a net-positive. Sorry.
Miller,
I can understand you. You don't want to break your git history
(blame). But when a code is clearly more readable/understandable you
must assume that it has a huge net-positive.
The patch improves the code in three ways:
- Only one if/else;
- Not blame on static analysis tools.
- And avoid more discussion about that in the future (nobody will send
patches like this to disturb you about that part of code).
The decision is yours.
Thanks again.