Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Subject | Re: condingstyle, was Re: utrace comments | Date | Wed, 02 May 2007 05:55:02 -0600 |
| |
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> writes:
> Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote: > >> Not lining up with the code following the if statement is also >> a plus. Because it clearly delineates the conditions from the code. > > But the condition doesn't line up with the code:
Exactly. The condition not lining up with the following code helps code helps separate the two.
> if (veryverylengthycondition1 && > smallcond2 && > (conditionnumber3a || > condition3b)) { > this_is_some_code(); > this_is_some_more_code(); > } > > Personally, for complicated conditions like this, I prefer: > > if (veryverylengthycondition1 && > smallcond2 && > (conditionnumber3a || > condition3b) > ) { > this_is_some_code(); > this_is_some_more_code(); > } > > But that seems to offend Andrew for some reason (or was it Christoph? or > both?).
Yes.
Although I suspect simply not tucking the trailing brace is as good or better. I believe not putting the beginning brace at the beginning of the line is a violation of coding style.
if (veryverylengthycondition1 && smallcond2 && (conditionnumber3a || condition3b)) { this_is_some_code(); this_is_some_more_code(); }
However there is the practical way to solve this if you have a sufficiently large conditional, or the conditional appears several times.
static inline int test_func() { if (!veryverylengthycondition1) return 0; if (!smallcond2) return 0; if (conditionnumber3A) return 1; if (condition3b) return 1; return 0; }
if (test_func()) { this_is_some_code(); this_is_some_more_code(); }
Eric - 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/
| |