Message-ID: <1418691057.2674.26.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch giving bogus advice (was staging: goldfish:
 Fix minor coding style)
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        Jeremiah Mahler <jmmahler@gmail.com>, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jun.j.tian@intel.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, octavian.purdila@intel.com,
        apw@canonical.com, nnk@google.com, alan@linux.intel.com
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 16:50:57 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20141215115956.GD4856@mwanda>
References: <e2a3b3ccf85790c865683832698908458931be6a.1418487651.git.loic@loicp.eu>
	 <20141213175518.GA28616@hudson.localdomain> <20141213182238.GA6979@iron>
	 <20141213194647.GA30065@hudson.localdomain>
	 <20141215114421.7389d32a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
	 <20141215115956.GD4856@mwanda>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2014-12-15 at 14:59 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I prefer !foo because it is more common in the kernel and I think it's
> easier to read but I don't feel strongly about this.

Me too.  But I do prefer consistency.

fyi: for variants of:

	"if (!foo)"
vs
	"if (foo == NULL)"

a little cocci script shows a preference for "if (!foo)"
of >5:1 in drivers/net/
(actual: 11557:2145)
and a little less (>3:1) in net/
(actual: 10263:3045)

$ cat pointer_style.cocci
@@
type T;
T *a;
@@

*	a == NULL

@@
type T;
T *a;
@@

*	a != NULL

@@
type T;
T *a;
@@

*	!a


--
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/