On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 03:31:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:17:44 -0400
> "Ed L. Cashin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > ugh. Do this:
> > >
> > > do {
> > > if (t == d->htgt)
> > > continue;
> > > if (!(*t)->ifp->nd)
> > > continue;
> > > if ((*t)->nout >= (*t)->maxout)
> > > continue;
> > >
> > > <stuff>
> > > } while (++t ...)
> >
> > Do you think the "stacked ifs" in the first version above could be
> > accepted as a convenient extension to the K&R-based conventions in
> > Documentation/CodingStyle?
>
> Maybe. I don't recall seeing any kernel code which uses that convention:
> everyone uses &&. So personally I'd prefer to see kernel code stick to the
> one convention, given that there is not, afacit, any significant advantage
> to the alternative one.
I agree, let's stick with the convention we already have and use
instead.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
