On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:21:10 +0200, Lucas De Marchi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Michael Jennings <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm all for consistency, and this is certainly a great tool for >> producing that consistency, but shouldn't a concensus be reached >> amongst the developers for stylistic personal preference changes as >> opposed to actual algorithmic correctness? >> > > I agree. But this is not *my* preference, it's EFL style as far as I > know. I may be wrong though. > > I tried to cover all the possible cases and the only exceptions were > when it's wrong not using E [=!]= NULL. I have the patch for all the > other libraries as well. > > Raster, k-s, others, what do you think? Can I apply for the other ones? > I think we are in the personal taste department here, so it's probably dangerous just to change this all over. As for e16 I think I changed my mind somewhere along the way in favor of what you suggest, so e16 is a bit messy here :) Feel free to make these changes in the E16 subtree. One question though - there are a lot of constructions like if ((p = strchr(s, ' ')) == NULL) return 0; I assume this would be changed to if (!(p = strchr(s, ' '))) return 0; which I don't like much. I'd prefer p = strchr(s, ' '); if (!p) return 0; Would it be possible to teach coccinelle that? :) /Kim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
