[ros-dev] Propose standards for the audit
James Hawkins
truiken at gmail.com
Sat Jan 28 08:21:22 CET 2006
On 1/28/06, Steven Edwards <winehacker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> Ok here are some proposed ground rules for the audit. Mostly thanks to
> Art and Alex. We are still open for debate on this
>
...
> 1. A function is deemed to have been implemented in a non-clean manner if
>
> - functions for which there is NO DOCUMENTATION
I think this condition isn't always evidence of a non-clean
implementation of a function. A developer might have written tests
for a function and not committed them back to ReactOS. This could be
rewritten as:
"If a function has NO DOCUMENTATION and no test cases exist either in
ReactOS or elsewhere, then test cases must be submitted to ReactOS."
> - functions with excessive gotos
>
This case is similar to the documentation case in that it's not direct
evidence of a non-clean implementation. I frequently use gotos for
releasing many resources in error cases as a way of factoring code. A
better wording would be:
"Functions with excessive gotos should be marked for further inspection."
--
James Hawkins
More information about the Ros-dev
mailing list