Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH/v2] CodingStyle updates | Date | Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:30:59 +0100 |
| |
On Friday, 15 December 2006 18:00, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:07:17 +0100 Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Fri 2006-12-15 08:52:22, Scott Preece wrote: > > > On 12/15/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: > > > >Hi! > > > > > > > >> Pavel Machek wrote: > > > >> >> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> > > > >> >> +Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary > > > >operators, > > > >> >> +such as any of these: > > > >> >> + = + - < > * / % | & ^ <= >= == != ? : > > > >> > > > > >> > Actually, this should not be hard rule. We want to allow > > > >> > > > > >> > j = 3*i + l<<2; > > > >> > > > >> Which would be very misleading. This expression evaluates to > > > >> > > > >> j = (((3 * i) + l) << 2); > > > >> > > > >> Binary + precedes <<. > > > > > > > >Aha, okay. So this one should be written as > > > > > > > > j = 3*i+l << 2; > > > > > > > >(Well, parenthesses should really be used. Anyway, sometimes grouping > > > >around operator is useful, even if I made mistake demonstrating that. > > > --- > > > > > > I think the mistake illuminates why parentheses should be the rule. If > > > you're thinking about using spacing to convey grouping, use > > > parentheses instead... > > > > Not in simple cases. > > > > 3*i + 2*j should be writen like that. Not like > > (3 * i) + (2 * j) > > I would just write it as: > 3 * i + 2 * j
\metoo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |