On Sat, 2018-05-12 at 19:07 +0300, igor.sto...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 12 May 2018 at 18:41, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> >
> > I think the first style should be preferred when the
> > combined character length of is
> > relatively long.
> >
>
> thank you, I could provide a patch to the docs for thi
On 12/05/18 18:41, Joe Perches wrote:
I personally like more the former, not to mention that it uses also one
line less, but it seems less common in the sources.
The coding style references do not seem to say anything explicit about
which style to prefer.
thank you, I could provide a patch to
On Sat, 2018-05-12 at 18:19 +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> I have been wondering if it's ok to break a long (function declaration)
> line in the following way:
>
> static __always_inline
> struct foo_bar *__get_foo_bar(type1 parm1, type2 parm2, type3 parm3)
>
>
> instead of:
>
> static __always_i
Hi,
I have been wondering if it's ok to break a long (function declaration)
line in the following way:
static __always_inline
struct foo_bar *__get_foo_bar(type1 parm1, type2 parm2, type3 parm3)
instead of:
static __always_inline struct foo_bar *__get_foo_bar(type1 parm1,
4 matches
Mail list logo
