Hi David,
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:30:15 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > > > Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
> > >
> > > But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
By definition of "needless", none. But the question is precisely
whether the parentheses are always needless. The wa
Hi Andrew,
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:51:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:25:30 +0200 Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Remove a not particularly relevant rule from CodingStyle.
> > Sometimes, printing numbers in parentheses doesn't add value, but in
> > some (most?
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:51:56 PDT, Andrew Morton said:
> Printing something like
>
> bytes remaining: 0x12 (18)
>
> is a quite logical thing to do, although pretty darm pointless.
On the other hand, printing this:
magic number: 0x2710
probably doesn't ring any bells, but if you c
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > > Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
>> >
>> > But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
>>
>> Who says that needless parens could provide value?
>
> Jean, which is why he submitted the patch.
> You, implicitly, by acking a patch sayi
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:30:15 -0700 David Brownell wrote:
> > > > Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
> > >
> > > But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
> >
> > Who says that needless parens could provide value?
>
> Jean, which is why he submitted the patch.
> You, implicitly, by
> > > Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
> >
> > But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
>
> Who says that needless parens could provide value?
Jean, which is why he submitted the patch.
You, implicitly, by acking a patch saying those parens are bad.
But not me ... I don't think
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 11:53:06 -0700 David Brownell wrote:
> > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Sep 29 11:40:17 2007
> >
> > Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
>
> But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
Who says that needless parens could provide value?
> "Yet Another Subtle And Hard
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Sep 29 11:40:17 2007
>
> Let's kill it, please. (i.e., ACK)
But ... why? What value could needless parens provide?
"Yet Another Subtle And Hard To Fix Source Of Bloat" is
not a plus.
I'd kind of think a change like this should have some
positive motivation.
-
To u
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:51:56 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:25:30 +0200 Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Remove a not particularly relevant rule from CodingStyle.
> > Sometimes, printing numbers in parentheses doesn't add value, but in
> > some (most?) cases it m
> > -Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided.
>
> I wonder how that got there.
Well, the only place that numbers "naturally" appear wrapped in
parenthesis is tables of credits and debits... as a debit, sort
of a literal "add no value" situation. ;)
Oh, and for fo
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:25:30 +0200 Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Remove a not particularly relevant rule from CodingStyle.
> Sometimes, printing numbers in parentheses doesn't add value, but in
> some (most?) cases it makes the message easier to read. As a matter of
> fact, this practi
Remove a not particularly relevant rule from CodingStyle.
Sometimes, printing numbers in parentheses doesn't add value, but in
some (most?) cases it makes the message easier to read. As a matter of
fact, this practice is widely used in the kernel:
linux-2.6.23-rc8$ quilt grep -I '(%l*[du])' | wc -
12 matches
Mail list logo
