Re: Style question: Should one check for NULL pointers?

[Alan Stern]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Eli Carter wrote:

> Alan Stern wrote:
> [snip]
> > Ultimately this comes down to a question of style and taste.  This 
> > particular issue is not addressed in Documentation/CodingStyle so I'm 
> > raising it here.  My personal preference is for code that means what it 
> > says; if a pointer is checked it should be because there is a genuine 
> > possibility that the pointer _is_ NULL.  I see no reason for pure 
> > paranoia, particularly if it's not commented as such.
> > 
> > Comments, anyone?
> 
> BUG_ON() perhaps?

Not really needed, since a segfault will produce almost as much 
information as a BUG_ON().  Certainly it will produce enough to let a 
developer know that the pointer was NULL.

Alan Stern>