| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ppc-devel
conditional on one line (was Re: [XenPPC] [pushed] [ppc] OF write method
The most efficient (in terms of our valuable time) way to resolve this
is to write and agree to a style list. Most people will conform to it.
Going back and forth on individual patches is just a general waste of
time. My vote on short and simpler examples like this one is to stay on
one line. That's just my vote. Let's vote/reason on it once, and
forever after stick with one decision. The same about other similar
things. And let's not do it with the subject line "OF write method."
Jimi Xenidis wrote:
On Apr 25, 2006, at 5:26 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 16:46 -0400, Jimi Xenidis wrote:
On Apr 25, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
+ if (rc == OF_FAILURE) return rc;
Please add a newline after the conditional.
Nah, Its valid, readable and simpler, I see no reason to change it.
It is also inconsistent with Xen and Linux style.
hmm, you asked for it...
$ find linux \( -name CVS -o -name SCCS -o -name .hg \) -prune -o \!
\( -name \*~ -o -name .#\* -o -name cscope.\* \) -type f -print0 |
xargs -0 -e egrep -n -e '\)[ ]+return[; ]' | wc -l
2520
$ find xen \( -name CVS -o -name SCCS -o -name .hg \) -prune -o \! \(
-name \*~ -o -name .#\* -o -name cscope.\* \) -type f -print0 | xargs
-0 -e egrep -n -e '\)[ ]+return[; ]' | wc -l
332
*whapish*
So does our use of
braces for single-line conditionals in PPC code, for that matter, but it
seems we are all in agreement on that one, and we are not on this one.
I'm indifferent to it (as others) but I will not complain if you
decide to adjust it to your liking.
-JX
_______________________________________________
Xen-ppc-devel mailing list
Xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-ppc-devel mailing list
Xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home