On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 05:38:36PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:19:47AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > On 09/06/20(Tue) 20:19, jo...@armadilloaerospace.com wrote:
> > > Looking for some guidance to avoid proposing any unpopular diffs.
> > >
> > > Style(9) says not
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:19:47AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 09/06/20(Tue) 20:19, jo...@armadilloaerospace.com wrote:
> > Looking for some guidance to avoid proposing any unpopular diffs.
> >
> > Style(9) says not to use static on file-local functions in the
> > kernel, because it
On 09/06/20(Tue) 20:19, jo...@armadilloaerospace.com wrote:
> Looking for some guidance to avoid proposing any unpopular diffs.
>
> Style(9) says not to use static on file-local functions in the
> kernel, because it interferes with the debugger. They still show up
> on some functions today; is
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 08:19:53PM -0700, jo...@armadilloaerospace.com wrote:
> Also, style(9) says that prototypes should not have variable names
> associated with the types. I try to use good names in the headers
> for documentation purposes; what is the thinking behind the rule?
function
Looking for some guidance to avoid proposing any unpopular diffs.
Style(9) says not to use static on file-local functions in the
kernel, because it interferes with the debugger. They still show up
on some functions today; is this still an issue?
I usually advocate for directly inlining small
