On 29/08/23 08:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 28.08.2023 15:19, Simone Ballarin wrote:
--- a/docs/misra/rules.rst
+++ b/docs/misra/rules.rst
@@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ maintainers if you want to suggest a change.
- Precautions shall be taken in order to prevent the contents of a
header file being included more than once
- Files that are intended to be included more than once do not need to
- conform to the directive
+ conform to the directive. Files that explicitly avoid inclusion guards
+ under specific circumstances do not need to conform the directive.
Nit: There's a "to" missing near the end of the added sentence. Can likely
be taken care of while committing, since Stefano has already ack-ed this,
but I'd like to still raise the question of the utility of this statement:
How is one to know whether omission of guards is intentional?
As suggested by Stefano, this kind of deviation should be done using
the format specified in safe.json, and I will follow his suggestion in
the next submission. The statement will disappear.
Jan
--
Simone Ballarin, M.Sc.
Field Application Engineer, BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
