Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261193AbUA3OsM (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:48:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261406AbUA3OsM (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:48:12 -0500 Received: from thunk.org ([140.239.227.29]:62382 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261193AbUA3OsL (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:48:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:44:42 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Tim Hockin , Andries Brouwer , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Lindent fixed to match reality Message-ID: <20040130144442.GA5081@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , 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> <20040129234336.GQ16675@khan.acc.umu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040129234336.GQ16675@khan.acc.umu.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 958 Lines: 26 On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:43:36AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > "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? I disagree; sometimes adding a few extra parenthesis *does* improve readability, especially if the expression is complex. Of course, if it's that complex, you might be better off defining a few extra variables and having named sub-expressions (it shouldn't make a difference to a good compiler). - Ted - 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/