Re: [PATCH/v2] CodingStyle updates

[Randy Dunlap]

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:11:27 +0000 Jörn Engel wrote:

> On Fri, 15 December 2006 09:00:37 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:07:17 +0100 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > > Not in simple cases.
> > > 
> > > 	3*i + 2*j should be writen like that. Not like
> > > 	(3 * i) + (2 * j)
> > 
> > I would just write it as:
> > 	3 * i + 2 * j
> 
> So would I.  But I definitely wouldn't write
> 	for (i = 0; i < 10; i += 2)

I would and do (the above).

> because I prefer the grouping in
> 	for (i=0; i<10; i+=2)
> 
> Pavel may have picked a bad example, but there are cases when spaces can
> be used to group code.  Just as empty lines can be used to group code.
> And in both cases the reason should be "readability".

Agreed.

> Which variant is the most readable is a highly personal matter and may
> alos change over time for any group of people.  I'd vote against a stone
> tablet with 10 commandments of taste.  "Make it readable, use common
> sense" is so much better, imo.

then send patches  :)

---
~Randy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/