Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266485AbUA2Xnm (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:43:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266291AbUA2Xnm (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:43:42 -0500 Received: from khan.acc.umu.se ([130.239.18.139]:46570 "EHLO khan.acc.umu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266485AbUA2Xnk (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:43:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:43:36 +0100 From: David Weinehall To: Tim Hockin Cc: Andries Brouwer , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Lindent fixed to match reality Message-ID: <20040129234336.GQ16675@khan.acc.umu.se> Mail-Followup-To: Tim Hockin , Andries Brouwer , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel References: <20040129193727.GJ21888@waste.org> <20040129201556.GK16675@khan.acc.umu.se> <20040129233730.A19497@pclin040.win.tue.nl> <20040129225456.GM16675@khan.acc.umu.se> <20040129231724.GA814@hockin.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040129231724.GA814@hockin.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Accept-Language: Swedish, English X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7ACE 0FB0 7A74 F994 9B36 E1D1 D14E 8526 DC47 CA16 X-GPG-Key: http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/files/pubkey_dc47ca16.gpg.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1381 Lines: 39 On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 03:17:24PM -0800, Tim Hockin wrote: [snip] > No, you're building a straw man. Everyone knows that you should always use > the parens on sizeof(). Just because you CAN leave them out SOMETIMES does > not mean you SHOULD. "Everyone" also sprinkles far too many parenthesis for their own code, just to be sure. I've seen code such as a = b * c + 1; written as a = ((b * c) + 1); The question is rather, why should you insert superfluous parenthesis when they do no semantic difference, and do not improve readability in any way? If you get paid by the byte, then sure, but I don't, so I won't... [snip] As mentioned earlier, if mister divine Pee-sprinkler decides that the CodingStyle for 2.6 should be without the space for sizeof/typeof, then I'll follow the leader when/if sending patches to the 2.6 kernel. 2.0 will still have the spaces in place, though. Regards: David Weinehall -- /) David Weinehall /) Northern lights wander (\ // Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/ - 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/