Marius Strobl schrieb:
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 01:37:23PM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Marius Strobl schrieb:
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.
This is mentioned nowhere in style(9) (in general it is lacking reasons
why something is some way or the other).
I agree that style(9) lacks explanations, however this doesn't
necessarily mean that non-obvious rules are "silly" and should
be removed.
I neither said not implied this. I said, that it is lacking in
justification, which clearly is bad.
Also I consider this as gross abuse: Macro names shall be in all
uppercase, so it is clear that there is a macro at work. Therefore
"return" is not a candidate. So this would violate yet another rule in
style(9) (the original return already violates the no-redundant
parentheses rule).
Also I would not mention __func__: there were objections against using
it in the past (though I, logically, prefer its use).
In general this is correct, a return() macro (in which case
the parentheses are not redundant) would be for local debugging
only and not ever hit the tree just like any other printf()-
debugging should not, so neither is relevant here. Besides,
a macro without side effects, which a return() macro typically
shouldn't have, is fine to be named all lowercase according
to style(9).
So everybody has to pay with a small amount of obfuscation per return
for an obscure trick, which compared to the number of returns is never used.
Therefore I don't consider the return-macro convincing at all.
Christoph
_______________________________________________
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"
