crypto: replace gotos #23132
crypto: replace gotos #23132
Conversation
nodejs-github-bot
added
c++
|
This conflicts with #23014. I kind of like this variant better, but I can close it if others don't feel the same. I'd prefer to use |
|
@tniessen - I was excited by the power of combining scoped variables. destructors and lambda, to tidy up the code and probably bring-in some functional programming elements to it when I developed #23014 . To me, other than the fact that the trapped object being destructed when leaving the scope (and leverage that destructor to run custom task on return), I don't see any connection with resource clean-up here. If you think this is more readable and efficient, I am not objecting. thanks! |
tniessen
force-pushed
the
crypto-replace-gotos
branch
from
158c3eb to
0120eb1
Compare
|
Rebased, old HEAD was 158c3eb063ba9983dfaca0067bf87455000f695e. @gireeshpunathil Thanks. I still liked your PR, I even approved it, I just forgot about it when I opened this one. |
addaleax
added
the
author ready
|
Landed in 640172d, thanks for reviewing. |
PR-URL: #23132 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Denys Otrishko <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #23132 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Denys Otrishko <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
tniessen
removed
the
author ready
These occurrences of
gotoare almost trivial and only end up callingEnd(). I personally don't think it makes the code less expressive, but I'd like to know if someone feels different.Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes