Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 20:11:30 -0500 From: Jake Burkholder <jake@locore.ca> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> Cc: dillon@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 critical.c src/sys/i386/include cpufunc.h critical.h src/sys/i386/isa apic_vector.s icu_vector.s src/sys/kern kern_fork.c kern_proc.c kern_switch.c src/sys/alpha/alpha critical.c src/sys/alpha/include cpufunc.h ... Message-ID: <20020401201130.K207@locore.ca> In-Reply-To: <20020401.175136.106024419.imp@village.org>; from imp@village.org on Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:51:36PM -0700 References: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020401.175136.106024419.imp@village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Apparently, On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:51:36PM -0700, M. Warner Losh said words to the effect of; > In message: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org> > Matt Dillon <dillon@FreeBSD.org> writes: > : Note: In general, developers should not gratuitously move declarations out > : of sub-blocks. They are where they are for reasons of structure, grouping, > : readability, compiler-localizability, and to avoid developer-introduced bugs > : similar to several found in recent years in the VFS and VM code. > > Yes. Style(9) says don't do this unless the code is really complicated: > > Parts of a for loop may be left empty. Do not put declarations inside > blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated. > > I suspect that the stuff you are working on is complicated enough to > justify their use. Style(9) doesn't say never do this. I personally don't like it, but I think you are correct. Jake To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020401201130.K207>