On 04/22/11 11:23, Ian Molton wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 08:21 -0500, Michael Roth wrote: >>>> + switch (level& G_LOG_LEVEL_MASK) { >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR: return "error"; >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL: return "critical"; >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING: return "warning"; >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_MESSAGE: return "message"; >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_INFO: return "info"; >>>> + case G_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG: return "debug"; >>>> + default: return "user"; >>>> + } >>> >>> Urgh! >>> >>> No two statements on the same line please! > > Always wondered what the logic for this one is. IMHO the above is FAR > neater than splitting it to near double its height. > > What kind of coding error does splitting this out aim to prevent? > missing break; / return; statements? Because I dont see how it achieves > that...
Hiding things you miss when reading the code, it's a classic for people to do if(foo) bleh(); on the same line, and whoever reads the code will expect the action on the next line, especially if foo is a long complex statement. It's one of these 'just don't do it, it bites you in the end' things. Jes