[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200707122015.12078.alistair@devzero.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:15:11 +0100
From: Alistair John Strachan <alistair@...zero.co.uk>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Mark Mason <mason@...adcom.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sb1250-duart.c: SB1250 DUART serial support
On Thursday 12 July 2007 19:16:20 Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
[snip]
> > WARNING: declaring multiple variables together should be avoided
> > #372: FILE: drivers/serial/sb1250-duart.c:246:
> > + unsigned int mctrl, status;
>
> Well, this is probably superfluous -- why would anyone prefer:
>
> int r0;
> int r1;
> int r2;
> int r3;
> int r4;
>
> to:
>
> int r0, r1, r2, r3, r4;
>
> unconditionally?
Imagine you're working on a piece of kernel code that has a lot of parallel
churn. Conflicts on lines like "int a,b,c,d;" are more likely to cause Andrew
et al pain, which I guess is the rationale for discouraging it. Conversely,
if the variables are kept separate, diff handles it fine.
I think as long as the variables are logically grouped, the pain is minimised,
but there's a few good reasons for the verbose style.
--
Cheers,
Alistair.
137/1 Warrender Park Road, Edinburgh, UK.
-
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