On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 04:16:38AM +0100, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> On 15.01.2009 03:55, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> >   
> >> Making strange code painful to look at is good.
> >>     
> >
> > ..to ensure that noone will ever want to look at it again, so that
> > bugs won't be found? Makes no sense.
> >
> > I consider the opposite to be true, in particular code with strange
> > logic should be easy on the eyes so that anyone who has even slight
> > interest could actually review it and maybe even spot a bug.
> >   
> 
> It is definitely easier on the eyes if you only have to look at two
> places at the same time (array and board enable function) now instead of
> three places (flash.h and array and board enable function) before.
> 
> The pain I was referring to is in the loads of NULL/0 stuff. It can be
> eliminated with liberal application of grep. The real question is why
> there are so many NULL/0 entries in the first place.
> 
> 
> > If the code is painful $person will just laugh and go away, leaving
> > bugs lingering..
> >   
> 
> Actually, there are bugs lingering in related code, but nobody bothered
> to fix it. Well, that's not entirely true. I bothered to send a patch,
> but iirc it was never acked. I can resend...
> 
> Anyway, this change makes it easy to add a new board without having to
> open two editor windows at the same time to find out the correct struct
> ordering. And that makes it easier for new contributors who just want to
> fix flashrom for their board.
> 
> The two-line layout was really painful. It was multiline (which you seem
> to dislike extremely) and it required anybody changing it to have
> flash.h open at the same time (which I think is more complicated than it
> should be).
> I consider anything to be an improvement over the old layout.
> 
> Regards,
> Carl-Daniel

flash.h? This table is fully file internal. The struct definition is 
right before the table!

My original code was single long line per entry.

Luc Verhaegen.

--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Reply via email to