That's really bad practice. The reason that it's there is so if, by
reason of a bug or hardware failure of any sort, return_user() does
really return, you will have bug that will be a nightmare to find. For
the savings of less than 10 bytes, it's not worth the risk.
Pat
Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
Салям!
31-Дек-2004 12:46 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luchezar Georgiev) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
+++ inthndlr.c 31 Dec 2004 12:46:21 -0000 1.87.2.13
@@ -752,7 +752,6 @@
return_user();
- break;
@@ -1025,7 +1027,6 @@
return_user();
- break;
I think, for readability purposes (to make understanding by new
developers easier) `break' should be remained as comment. Something like:
/* return_user() never returns, so "break" not need */
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
Freedos-kernel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
Freedos-kernel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
