lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: condingstyle, was Re: utrace comments
On 5/1/07, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 08:05 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > I prefer this format also, but I'm not sure that we can get it
> > into CodingStyle. CodingStyle is about (either) concensus or
> > dictum, but I don't see us close to concensus...

Yes, some of these styles are too personal and subjective to even try
and standardize. And then often even the same person doesn't follow a
single convention across his own code. More likely you'd succeed
standardizing *religion* than this ...

> CodingStyle is mostly about consensus. We don't have a consensus, which
> is why this particular stuff isn't specified in CodingStyle. :)

Actually, I'm not sure if we really gain much by finding consensus for
this particular stuff. Most compound conditions only contain upto 3-4
operators/expressions, so most of the styles discussed here would be
almost equally readable. And any code that goes beyond 3-4
operators/expressions is probably ugly in many other ways and needs to
fix its logic.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-05-01 22:47    [W:0.204 / U:0.540 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site