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
