svn commit: r361209 - head/sys/netinet

[Ian Lepore]

On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 23:01 +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> > On 18. May 2020, at 22:48, Ian Lepore <ian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 22:43 +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> > > > Sure.  You can certainly ignore user reports corresponding to
> > > > bogus
> > > > flags, though, and encourage use of various flags.
> > > 
> > > I could, but decided to improve the situation for some people,
> > > but
> > > wasn't realising that I made it worse for others. Sorry about
> > > that.
> > 
> > I'm trying to figure out why your original commit was a problem.  I
> > understand why it was questioned, but once the answer came out,
> > it's
> > clear that the code you originally committed does what it's
> > supposed to
> > without any harmful side effects.  Sure, freebsd doesn't strictly
> > need
> 
> I guess the point Conrad is making, that on FreeBSD the check is not
> needed, since the call can not fail. So the FreeBSD code base would
> not
> be consistent: within the SCTP related code the return code is
> checked,
> in the other code it is not.
> > it, but the code is shared among projects, so what's the harm in
> > the
> > extra check that helps other projects sharing the code?  It's
> > certainly
> > a lot less confusion and code clutter than any of the "remedies"
> > that
> > have been discussed.
> 
> Yepp, sharing code between platforms makes things harder. Running the
> same
> code in kernel land and userland does not make it simpler. Different
> groups
> have different opinions/styles/...
> 
> I'll revert the commit tomorrow and a variadic macros
> SCTP_SNPRINTF(), which
> will map on FreeBSD to snprintf() and on the other platforms will do
> the check.
> 
> If the build problem comes up on FreeBSD userland (and I have no idea
> if that
> is the case, since I don't know how Firefox / Chrome are build on
> FreeBSD),
> I leave it up to the port maintainer of the application to deal with
> it.
> 
> Best regards
> Michael
> > 
> > -- Ian
> > 
> 
> 

Well it seems to me you're being asked to do a lot of extra work that
has the final result of making the code LESS clear and MORE complex,
because of one person's opinion.  I'm actually a bit tempted to
complain about the change, because to me it reduces rather than
improves code quality.

-- Ian