[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a3cbc2cf-7371-3e2b-e794-4fbfc52aaad9@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:12:21 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] proc/bootconfig: Fix to use correct quotes for value
On 6/15/20 3:42 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:30:41 -0700
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>>>> Please don't infect kernel sources with that style oddity.
>>>
>>> What do you mean? It's already "infected" all over the kernel, (has
>>> been for years!) and I kinda like it. It makes reading variables much
>>> easier on the eyes, and as I get older, that means a lot more ;-)
>>
>> Yeah, there is some infection, more in some places than others,
>> but I agree with Joe -- it's not needed or wanted by some of us.
>
> We all have preferences. But for code that I need to review, I prefer
> it.
>
> Why would you be bothered by it? Which is easier on the eyes to read
> variables?
"to read variables"? I mostly read code, not variables.
> struct xbc_node *leaf, *vnode;
> const char *val;
> char q;
> char *key, *end = dst + size;
> int ret = 0;
>
> or
>
> struct xbc_node *leaf, *vnode;
> char *key, *end = dst + size;
> const char *val;
> char q;
> int ret = 0;
>
> ?
But yes, we all have preferences. For data declaration, mine is more like
order of use or some grouping having to do with locality.
cheers.
--
~Randy
Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists