Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept

From: Valdis.Kletnieks@private
Date: Fri Jan 28 2005 - 11:38:31 PST

Previous message: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
In reply to: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Next in thread: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Reply: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:24:49 EST, John Richard Moser said:

> > My point was that inode_handle_create() probably *SHOULD* be able to
> > throw an error....
> 
> yeah but I didn't know what to do if it did :)

Well, that *does* follow Duff's First Law of Systems Programming:

"Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle"

(No, I don't know if Tom Duff actually said that, but it's attributed
to him anyhow.)

application/pgp-signature attachment: stored

Previous message: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
In reply to: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Next in thread: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Reply: John Richard Moser: "Re: Stacking LSM proof-of-concept"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Jan 28 2005 - 11:39:01 PST