Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Mar 2009 20:17:34 +0100
From:      Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc:        src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, avg@FreeBSD.org, marius@alchemy.franken.de, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r190098 - in head/sys/sparc64: fhc sparc64
Message-ID:  <49CE77CE.3040801@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <49C68197.1060204@elischer.org>
References:  <49C5737F.1050902@gmx.de>	<20090321.175756.-434257642.imp@bsdimp.com>	<49C5F88C.3070600@freebsd.org> <20090322.070349.195750067.imp@bsdimp.com> <49C68197.1060204@elischer.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer schrieb:
> M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> In message: <49C5F88C.3070600@freebsd.org>
>>             Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> writes:
>> : E.g. you can have a simple 3 line block where you need a local variable
>> : but that block is located 50 lines from start of an enclosing function.
>> : Very convenient when you need to quickly glance the variable's type 
>> (not).
>>
>> No you don't.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with putting them at
>> the top.  In fact, it is simpler, really, than having to go hunting
>> for dozens of different declarations.  As someone who has spent a lot
>> of time looking at code, the time wasted looking for these damn-fool
>> things really adds up.
> 
> and in a complicated function, if you have them all over the place you 
> have no idea as to what the potential stack usage of the function is..
> This matters in the kernel.

The declared local variables are neither a lower *nor* an upper bound 
for stack usage.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49CE77CE.3040801>