Re: coding style for long conditions (WAS: Re: [PATCH 25/90] ...blinky leds!!)

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Apr 6 2007 15:40, David Brownell wrote:
>> >	if (...) {
>> >		THAT WAS ONE MORE TAB
>> >	}
>> >
>> >Come on, stop wasting everyone's time with utter nonsense.
>> I was never debating these two things. 
>Actually, you did.

If it was perceived I did, then I owe you an apology.

>Go back and see the point I was specifically
>disagreeing with.  It related to the body of the "if" block,
>which you had said would **NOT** indent by a single tab.

Ok somewhere is a bug. What is the body an if block, for you? To avoid
that confusion, I termed these "condition" and "code":

	if(condition1 ||	/* if() line */
	    condition2) {	/* continuation line */
		code;		/* body */
		code;		/* body */
	}

And I think I made that pretty clear in <http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/5/293>,
which part is what, and how I like things.
In <http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/6/133>, the loop begins then.
Yes, it does not match "(a) only use tabs", but it matches the
rest of kernel code.


Jan
-- 
-
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/