Re: [PATCH] teach checkpatch.pl about list_for_each

[Christer Weinigel]

On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:17:29 +0200
Benny Halevy <bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Jan. 03, 2008, 14:30 +0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > Agreed, CodingStyle is not about mindless consistency such as "for
> > (" is the right thing, so "list_for_each (" is consistent with it,
> > it is about codifying practice contributors got used to over the
> > years.
> > 
> 
> Why mindless?
> Coding style is also about giving the coding language logic a
> graphical representation.  Following a convention that flow control
> keywords such as "if", "for", or "while" are distinguished from
> function calls by use of a space after the keyword really helps the
> code readability regardless of how people used to code it in the
> past... The for_each_* macros are clearly not function calls but
> rather translate to for () flow control constructs hence they should
> follow the same convention. FWIW, I think that changing the existing
> convention is worth it in this case.

Definite agreement here, since _for_each is used for flow control, that
space should be there.  

And some people seem to take checkpatch.pl as the gospel, and won't
apply code with checkpatch warnings.

  /Christer
--
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/