[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/2] Framebuffer split

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/2] Framebuffer split
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 23:01:03 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:36:37PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Please go ahead (I assume it raises no warnings and it's well tested).
> I tested the latest version with gfxterm and xnu loader. I use
> previous version in my daily bootloader. I'll run another series of
> tests before comitting.
> >
> > One small detail:
> >
> >> +  grub_free (mode_list);
> >> +  mode_list = 0;
> >
> > I would prefer if we used NULL for pointers.  I know we don't do that
> > everywhere, but it makes code easier to understand.
> >From GCS: "Zero without a cast is perfectly fine as a null pointer
> constant, except when calling a varargs function. "

Even if it's not mandated by GCS, it does make the code easier to read,
because of the loaded meaning in this expression (just like 'A' can be
more meaningful than 0x41).

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]