Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 17:51:36 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> To: dillon@FreeBSD.org Cc: 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: <20020401.175136.106024419.imp@village.org> In-Reply-To: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Warner
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?20020401.175136.106024419.imp>