I agree, the GNU coding style is a bit counter-intuitive. Not sure that I care a whole lot though. I'll try to stick to the style in the current file I am working on.
About the only thing I do care about is the use of curly-braces, and frankly I don't think I'm ever going to convince anyone to change :). The style of not always 100% of the time using curly braces annoys me and I think it leads to easily avoidable bugs( ala the ripd bug I fixed on friday night is a great example ). donald On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Christian Franke < ch...@opensourcerouting.org> wrote: > On 04/11/2016 07:58 AM, Paul Jakma wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2016, David Lamparter wrote: > >> FWIW, I would go further and accept Linux style on a per-file basis in > >> other > >> parts of Quagga. > > > > I'd rather leave it at GNU style being the default and recommended for > > the project [...] Different style everywhere is just jarring though and > > that annoys me the most - switching is annoying both on typing and > > reading. > > Given that the majority of other projects seems to be using kernel > style, at least that is what I encounter for almost anything other than > Quagga, I would prefer if we could allow for the kernel style to be used > in Quagga. The argument of consistency could also be made to the point > that it would be useful if people could constistently write code in the > style which they are accustomed to. At least to me, this kind of > consistenency would provide much more value than to consistently use the > traditional coding style of Quagga. > > Therefore, I think that David's suggested change is a good compromise > between keeping the coding style of existing code consistent and to > allow new contributions to be made in a way that allows people to think > about the code they write, instead of its style. > > -Christian > > ps> I find the GNU coding style much less readable than the Kernel > coding style: With GNU style, the curly braces of control structures are > shifted by 2 spaces in relation to code, while code itself is shifted by > a width of 4 unless the block is not using braces in which case it is > only indented by 2. > Given this irregularity of indentation levels and their small width, I > often cannot easily discern the overall structure of a function in many > cases where multiple control structures like loops and if statements are > nested, especially if there are long code blocks and/or control > structures are closed in short succession. > > In contrast to that, kernel style uses a consistent indentation of one > tab, equaling 8 spaces. Indentation of code does not depend on whether > its containing control structure is using braces. Also, by indenting > with a shiftwidth of 8, the creation of megamoths, which quagga has > quite some of, is discouraged, which I believe to be a good thing. > > _______________________________________________ > Quagga-dev mailing list > Quagga-dev@lists.quagga.net > https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev >
_______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list Quagga-dev@lists.quagga.net https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
