Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Possible false positive in checkpatch | From | Krzysztof Halasa <> | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:29:02 +0200 |
| |
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> writes:
> ERROR: space prohibited after that '*' (ctx:BxW)
> Certainly this is a rather uncommon code construction, but similar > ones might occur elsewhere. To my eyes, > > (* (type *) ptr) > > looks better than > > (*(type *) ptr) > > or > > (*(type *)ptr) > > or even > > (*(type*)ptr) > > but of course this is a matter of opinion. Is there any strong feeling > about this in the kernel community?
I think checkpatch already has gone way too far with this (and not only this).
"type *var" vs "type* var" - sure, the latter is worse and provokes "type* var1, var2", but anything else is IMHO only annoying and, actually, not important WRT readability at all.
For example I prefer "type* func()" - as it's a function returning "a pointer to type" and not "a pointer to a function returning type" (which "type *func()" may suggest). Yes, func is not a pointer, so why write "*" next to it? -- Krzysztof Halasa
| |