On 12/09/2015 05:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
+void
+fn_40_implicit_level_1 (int arg)
+{
+if (flagA)
+ foo (0);
+
+ foo (1);
+
The distinction I want to make here is between badly indented code vs
misleadingly indented code. Yes, the code is badly indented, but to my
eyes the code is suffici
On 12/09/2015 04:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> This is about managing the signal:noise ratio for something in -Wall.
>
> The distinction I want to make here is between badly indented code vs
> misleadingly indented code. Yes, the code is badly indented, but to my
> eyes the code is sufficiently
On Wed, 2015-12-09 at 16:40 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/09/2015 04:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > +/* The following function contains examples of bad indentation that's
> > + arguably not misleading, due to a blank line between the guarded and the
> > + non-guarded code. Some of the b
On 12/09/2015 04:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
+/* The following function contains examples of bad indentation that's
+ arguably not misleading, due to a blank line between the guarded and the
+ non-guarded code. Some of the blank lines deliberately contain
+ redundant whitespace, to verify
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 16:41 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/02/2015 12:35 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> >
> >> diff --git a/gdb/ada-lang.c b/gdb/ada-lang.c
> >> index fff4862..2559a36 100644
> >> --- a/gdb/ada-lang.c
> >> +++ b/gdb/ada-lang.c
> >> @@ -11359,9 +11359,11 @@ ada_evaluate_subexp (struct
