| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <2375c9f90703110715v4278f83flbc9fce6c542472a5@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:15:27 +0800 From: "Cong WANG" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Style Question Hi, list! I have a question about coding style in linux kernel. In Documention/CodingStyle, it is said that "Linux style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. Don't use C99-style "// ..." comments." _But_ I see a lot of '//' style comments in current kernel code. Which is wrong? The documentions or the code, or neither? And why? Another question is about NULL. AFAIK, in user space, using NULL is better than directly using 0 in C. In kernel, I know it used its own NULL, which may be defined as ((void*)0), but it's _still_ different from raw zero. So can I say using NULL is better than 0 in kernel? Any reply is welcome. Thanks and have a nice day! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists