Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:09:52 -0500 From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> To: FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: need C help, passing char buffer[] by-value.... Message-ID: <20091020150952.GB42322@Grumpy.DynDNS.org> In-Reply-To: <20091020054241.ce4a38fe.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <20091019013337.GA9522@thought.org> <4ADBFDBA.6040702@pchotshots.com> <20091019170634.GA12371@thought.org> <4ADCAB4F.5040707@mahan.org> <20091020054241.ce4a38fe.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 05:42:41AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: > Just a little and quite formal side note: > > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:09:19 -0700, Patrick Mahan <mahan@mahan.org> wrote: > > while (*tp != '\0' && *tp++ != '<'); > > It's often a good choice, especially for increasing readability > of code, to code the "empty statement" on a line on its own (as > you usually put any statements on an own line for clarity), so > the reader doesn't accidentally take it as and "end of command" > notification, e. g. > > while(1) > ; > > instead of > > while(1); Agreed. I did exactly this in a code sample posted earlier in this thread. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091020150952.GB42322>