Re: Coding style on function signatures (was: Convert tasklets to work queues )

2007-07-08 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Jul 7 2007 18:49, Jim Cromie wrote: > forex: > > static ssize_t > store_fan_div (struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *devattr, > const char *buf, size_t count) > {...} > > IIRC, many like the entire sig on one line, because its grep friendly. > I personally like the ab

Re: Coding style on function signatures (was: Convert tasklets to work queues )

2007-07-07 Thread Oleg Verych
>> static ssize_t >> store_fan_div (struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *devattr, >> const char *buf, size_t count) >> {...} >> >> >> IIRC, many like the entire sig on one line, because its grep friendly. >> I personally like the above, but grep-ability is hard to argu

Re: Coding style on function signatures (was: Convert tasklets to work queues )

2007-07-07 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:49:07 -0600 Jim Cromie wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > > Yes, code should be less than 80 characters wide. > > > > But hey, sometimes it's just more readable to have one line that is > > slightly longer than it should be, than to split something that is awkward

Coding style on function signatures (was: Convert tasklets to work queues )

2007-07-07 Thread Jim Cromie
Linus Torvalds wrote: Yes, code should be less than 80 characters wide. But hey, sometimes it's just more readable to have one line that is slightly longer than it should be, than to split something that is awkward to split. < cc-list heavily trimmed > could you speak to the speci