[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070604175751.GB3437@dhcp83-182.boston.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:57:51 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Documentation/CodingStyle: Add rules for goto labels
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:43:51AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > On Jun 4 2007 10:27, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>> Seconded. All my code contains the goto label in the first column.
> >>>
> >>> IMO any other goto label indentation is silly, because it obscures the
> >>> goto label within the code block.
> >> I would have to disagree with this. IMNSHO, a goto label is like a case
> >> label, and they should be treated the same way.
> >
> > But gotos are special. ("Evil" minus the "it's good for unrolling in case of an
> > error" case).
> >
>
> So?
>
> You still want them to be associated with the level the bailout happens at.
A matter of opinion :) I tend to think goto is special enough to
warrant column 1 unconditionally. It is special, so it draws additional
attention over and above case labels.
I and others have been tripped up when programmers "hide" goto
statements among regular statements.
IMO goto warrants a big flashing "notice me" sign.
Jeff
-
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