On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:55, <hwri...@apache.org> wrote: >> Author: hwright >> Date: Mon May 2 14:55:34 2011 >> New Revision: 1098610 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1098610&view=rev >> Log: >> Use our "typical" function call syntax when using function pointers in the >> delta editor. >> >> One of the things that has always puzzled me is why (*func_ptr)(args) and >> func_ptr(args) are equivalent. While this remains an enigma, I much prefer >> the consistency offered by using the same syntax throughout our code base, >> and since this appears to be the odd file out, it get's the change. > > I use the (*foo->bar)(...) form because the operator precedence and > binding is clearer. foo->bar(...) kind seems like bar(..) is getting > called, then something weird is going on with foo->. Yes, it is true > that foo->$result does not make sense, BUT: the brain recognizes that > *after* parsing bar(...) first. So when you see code like this, your > brain does a two-step. It just isn't smooth reading. Thus, the use of > (*foo->bar)(...). There is no pause in the brain's parsing of what is > actually happening there. > > My preference would be to revert this change, to keep the previous > readability. We've generally allowed slight style variances as long as > a single file is consistent.
Fine by me, though I've never noticed the mental do-si-do you describe above. At the end of the day it's just a bikeshed, so I'll give it a bit to allow others to weigh in. -Hyrum
