[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] [condingstyle] Add chapter on tests

    On May 25 2007 10:25, Auke Kok wrote:
    >diff --git a/Documentation/CodingStyle b/Documentation/CodingStyle
    >index f518395..3635b38 100644
    >--- a/Documentation/CodingStyle
    >+++ b/Documentation/CodingStyle
    >@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ int fun(int a)
    > int result = 0;
    > char *buffer = kmalloc(SIZE);
    >- if (buffer == NULL)
    >+ if (!buffer)
    > return -ENOMEM;

    Please don't do this. With ==NULL/!=NULL, it is clear what
    <randomvariable> could be (integer or pointer) without needing
    to look it up. It also reads quite strange: "if not buffer".
    For bools ('adjectives' / 'is a'), it works, not so much for ptrs.

    >+If you give your variables and pointers good names, there is never a need
    >+to compare the value stored in that variable to NULL or true/false, so
    >+omit all that and keep it short.

    >+ ptr = s->next;
    >+ if (!ptr)
    >+ return;

    Not agreed.

    >+ v = (read_byte(register));
    >+ if (v & mask)
    >+ return;

    well, yes.

    >+ if (is_prime(number))


    And I'd also like to mention one rather special case where I'd rather
    like to see ==0 than ! for clarity (!strcmp looks like !streq, so
    one needs to look twice to get it):

    if (!strcmp(hay, needle))

    At least don't force the '!' doctrine.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-05-26 21:33    [W:0.029 / U:13.140 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site