> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
> >
> > return with parentheses:
> > Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
> > is no source for confusion here, so the rule even contradicts the rule,
> > which states not to use redundant parentheses. Maybe, decades ago it was
> > just a workaround for a broken compiler, which does not exist anymore.
>
> FYI, the idea behind this rule is said to be to able to use
> a macro return(), f.e. for debugging you then can do:
> #define return(x) do {
> \
> printf("returning from %s with %d\n", __func__, (x)); \
> return (x); \
> } while (0)
>
> Given the this is a nifty feature and parentheses around the
> return value don't hurt maintainability in any way IMO this
> rule should stay.
short version:
not nifty, dirty yes!
long version:
it's already quiet difficult to read the sources with so many MaCrOs roaming
around, but if you change if, return, then, else, switch etc, etc
to a macro invocation, there will be a slight discrepancy between
the undertsanding of the code and its running effect.
btw, what if x is a pointer?, or a quad? or a complex ...
my .02$
danny
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
