Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Mon Feb 17 14:55:12 MST 2014

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:48:01PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> 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
> > 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.

By the way, the relevant section from README.Coding is:

> Macros like NT_STATUS_NOT_OK_RETURN that change control
> flow (return/goto/etc) from within the macro are
> considered bad, because they look like function calls that
> never change control flow. Please do not use them in new
> code.

What piece of "Please do not use them in new code" did you
not understand?


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

More information about the samba-technical mailing list