In message <[email protected]>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
>> style(9) is not KNF, and never was intended to be. It's a FreeBSD style
>> guide that bears similarity to KNF because that's what it used as a
>> starting point.
>
>I think we can safely presume that Bruce has been overruled on this
>one. If the collective definition is different than his, and it seems
>to be, then the collective definition prevails. I very much enjoy the
>work Bruce does in keeping us honest in various ways, but I don't
>recall ever handing him the keys to the city and carte blanche over
>all commits. :-)
I also value what Bruce is doing (very much so!), but I tend to
agree with Jordan here, style(9) needs to be a little bit more
tolerant than KNF.
On the other hand style(9) should still firmly outlaw stuff like:
/* wait 10 ms */
if (((error = tsleep((caddr_t)dev, PPBPRI | PCATCH,
"ppbpoll", hz/100)) != EWOULDBLOCK) != 0) {
return (error);
}
(The identity of the guilty party is known to the CVS repository)
My two personal problems with style(9) are the same which many
others have been complaining about: more tolerant of {} and ()
added for readability.
It would also be nice if somebody whould coerse ident to DTRT.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[email protected] "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
