On 2024-10-10 14:14, David Marchand wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 1:56 PM Mattias Rönnblom <hof...@lysator.liu.se> wrote:
OK. Nothing obvious from what I can see in the code. Unrelated: why did
you remove all empty lines in the "template" macros? Makes them much
harder to read.
Those macros are hard to read.
Even the more reason to make them easier to read.
There was an extra indent that resulted in splitting many lines.
They were just formatted with the same indentation as all other macros,
no? So not "extra".
That said, the indentation leaves less room on for the actual code, so I
have no issue with the removal of the standard multi-line macro
indentation, although it wouldn't have hurt to have pointed this out
earlier, so we wouldn't have to have this discussion after-the-fact.
So I started with removing this extra indent.
Then, the trailing tabs (with some pseudo randomly mixed in spaces)
were replaced with a single space before the \ for line continuation.
This enhances code review for update: with a single systematic space,
there is no need to consider if you must update all the context when
adding a line longer than what was already present.
DPDK uses both the kernel-style multi-line macro formatting, and what
you describe above.
Your argument above makes sense, but I also find the kernel style more
visually appealing.
In the end, I was left with cases like:
<some code> \
\
<some code> \
And I preferred to remove this extra line as it did not enhance the
clarity of those macros.
<some code> \
\
<some code> \
Would have been visually more appealing, but less consistent.
To me, removing these delimiting empty lines is no different from doing
the same in a regular C function. Empty lines are delimiters, there to
group related statements, and they serve a purpose. Now, the macros look
like they are written by someone who doesn't care about readability.
