[PATCH][SAMBA_4_0] modular services configuration

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 17:12 -0400, simo wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 13:19 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > simo schrieb:
> > > On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 16:22 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> > > 
> > >>> Will try to address the problems you mentioned soon, are you ok if I
> > >>> commit it to the tree when these problems are solved? Or do you prefer
> > >>> to review the code again as a patch?
> > >> as patch please:-)
> > > 
> > > And here it is.
> > 
> > I almost happy:-)
> > 
> > just a few minor things:
> > 
> > - - can you change the error handling
> >   from if ((foo = function()) == NULL)
> >   of if (!NT_STATUS_IS_OK(function())
> >   into
> >   foo = function();
> >   if (!foo) ...
> >   and
> >   ntstatus = function();
> >   if (!NT_STATUS_IS_OK(ntstatus))
> 
> Uhmm this is the new convention for code in samba3, but I am not a
> particular fan of this method.

Likewise, I strongly prefer 
  ntstatus = function();
  if (!NT_STATUS_IS_OK(ntstatus))

I find it much clearer, and avoids very long, painful 
if statements, particularly with the NT_STATUS_IS_OK macro. 

I was surprised at this change in the Samba3 convention, but apparently
I didn't protest at the right point in time...

> >   I think this is much more readable and
> >   in gdb you can do a p ntstatus, and also this is
> >   how the rest of samba4 looks like

Agreed.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.                  http://redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20060722/b8eb58c9/attachment.bin