This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch] Accelerate blocks sorting

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <> writes:

Jan> +  return (BLOCK_START (b) > BLOCK_START (a))
Jan> +	 - (BLOCK_START (b) < BLOCK_START (a));

Tom> This expression needs parens around it, according to GNU rules.

Jan> GNU Coding Standards provides this sample code line:
Jan>          return ++x + bar ();

Jan> Moreover it has no sample code (and found no rules) with `return'
Jan> using parens.  GDB uses `return' with parens a lot but I find it
Jan> a GNU style violation by GDB fixing it along in the patches.

Jan> Sure no problem to change it but is there any backing for such parens?

Yeah.  It isn't the return, but the splitting.
>From (info "(standards) Formatting") :

       Insert extra parentheses so that Emacs will indent the code properly.
    For example, the following indentation looks nice if you do it by hand,

         v = rup->ru_utime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_utime.tv_usec/1000
             + rup->ru_stime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_stime.tv_usec/1000;

    but Emacs would alter it.  Adding a set of parentheses produces
    something that looks equally nice, and which Emacs will preserve:

         v = (rup->ru_utime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_utime.tv_usec/1000
              + rup->ru_stime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_stime.tv_usec/1000);

And, yes, the GNU style is partly defined as "make it work nicely in

Tom> I think you don't actually need a cleanup here, as nothing here can
Tom> call error.  However, if you want to leave it, that is also ok with
Tom> me.

Jan> I did not notice, still I find the code safer that way.

Sounds good.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]