linux-kernel - Re: CodingStyle question: multiple statements on a single line

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:22:12 -0400
From:	lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen)
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	Mike Isely <isely@...ox.com>, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	v4l-dvb maintainer list <v4l-dvb-maintainer@...uxtv.org>
Subject: Re: CodingStyle question: multiple statements on a single line

On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:01AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> 	if (a) {
> 		b;
> 	}
> 
> to
> 
> 	if (a)
> 		b;
> 

Why oh why the kernel do this stupid style?

I hate that.  It makes debuging such a pain in the @#$@#$.  Anytime you
want to do anything in that area you have to add back the missing '{}'
around the statement, so that you can add debug statements to the
condition.

Stupid stupid stupid!!!

It is so annoying when you accidentally break the code by trying to
debug it by doing:

	if (a)
		printk("Trying to do b\n");
		b;

Usually kernel style makes sense, but this part is stupid, inconsistend
with how any condition with multiple statements is done, and error
prone, especially when trying to debug.

Who's stupid idea was this anyhow?

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
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/