On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 13:12 -0700, Devin Teske wrote: > > > > On Jul 19, 2018, at 12:59 PM, Ian Lepore <i...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 19:53 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +++ head/sys/netinet/sctp_asconf.c Thu Jul 19 19:33:42 2018 > > > > (r336503) > > > > static struct mbuf * > > > > -sctp_asconf_error_response(uint32_t id, uint16_t cause, uint8_t > > > > *error_tlv, > > > > +sctp_asconf_error_response(uint32_t id, uint16_t cause, uint8_t * > > > > error_tlv, > > > This looks strange now. In C, asterisk is usually placed by the variable. > > "usually" may be true of freebsd, but most places I've worked consider > > the * (and & in c++) to be more associated with the type being declared > > than with the variable name, thus they get snugged up against the type > > info, not the var name. Putting the * or & with the var name leads to > > particularly bad constructs such as > > > > int a, *b; > > > > which, for maximal clarity, should be: > > > > int a; > > int* b; > > > Are we free to prefer the former in C if that's how we've been coding in C > for 20+ years?
Only if I'm free to consider that kind of sarcasm to be a completely inappropriate response to what I said. -- Ian _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
