Removing the NT_STATUS_HAVE_NO_MEMORY_AND_FREE macro

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Mon Feb 17 14:48:01 MST 2014


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:14:26AM +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> If/when a patch is submitted that is sweeping, I could understand the
> concern, but I think it would be better to document
> NT_STATUS_HAVE_NO_MEMORY and NT_STATUS_NOT_OK_RETURN as exceptions in
> README.Coding.  Our code should reflect our coding standards, otherwise
> we get all the pain but none of the gain from having them.  That is,
> coding standards should never be a case of 'do what I say, not what I
> do'. 

Can you please point out where we agreed to make
README.Coding the rule also for existing code? I can not
remember this discussion, please refresh my memory. All my
understanding so far was to make this a guideline for new
code and to not touch existing code just for the reason of
making it comply with README.Coding.

Thanks,

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de


More information about the samba-technical mailing list