On Tue, 2019-09-10 at 16:33 +0100, Leif Lindholm wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 02:35:15PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > On 09/06/19 14:26, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 08:38:17PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > > > Repo: > > > > https://github.com/lersek/edk2-CCodingStandardsSpecification.git > > > > Branch: spurious_assign_bz_607 > > > > > > > > HTML-rendered views of the modified pages: > > > > - > > > > https://lersek.gitbooks.io/laszlo-s-fork-of-the-edk-ii-c-coding-standards-sp/content/v/spurious_assign_bz_607 > > > > - > > > > https://lersek.gitbooks.io/laszlo-s-fork-of-the-edk-ii-c-coding-standards-sp/content/v/spurious_assign_bz_607/6_documenting_software/62_comments.html > > > > - > > > > https://lersek.gitbooks.io/laszlo-s-fork-of-the-edk-ii-c-coding-standards-sp/content/v/spurious_assign_bz_607/6_documenting_software/64_what_you_must_comment.html > > > > > > > > The first two patches are cleanups for things that popped up in > > > > the > > > > discussion in < > > > > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607>;. > > > > > > > > The third patch is the one fixing the BZ. > > > > > > For 1 and 2, > > > Reviewed-by: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindh...@linaro.org> > > > > > > For 3, I see no issue with it, but I do feel tempted by Phil's > > > input > > > of using explicit macros (obviating the need for specific > > > comment). > > > I seem to recall back in the mists of time we considered > > > something > > > similar. > > > > Yes, I remember similarly. > > > > > Vaguely. Am I misremembering, or did we disount that option? > > > > Phil's current recommendation is what I would have preferred back > > then, > > but it was rejected, as far as I recall. If I remember correctly, > > most > > developers preferred naked NULLs / zeroes. I insisted on the > > comment as > > a fallback / compromise, so that we'd have at least some visual > > cue. > > I'm not even sure I wasn't one of the people opposed to it then. > But if I was, I would appear to have changed my mind. > > > I could be mis-remembering; we can restart that discussion if now > > the > > macros are preferred. > > I would be all for that.
If my 2 cents are worth anything, that'd be preferred by some folks in my team too. Although something shorter like "UNINITIALIZED_INT/PTR" would be nicer, IMO. Both work of course. Richard > However, I see no reason why we shouldn't document the current > process > in the meantime, so for 3/3 also: > Reviewed-by: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindh...@linaro.org> > > Best Regards, > > Leif > > > Thanks, > > Laszlo > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Leif > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Laszlo > > > > > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com> > > > > Cc: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindh...@linaro.org> > > > > Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > > > > Cc: Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com> > > > > > > > > Laszlo Ersek (3): > > > > comments: remove "Horror Vacui" rule > > > > comments: restrict and clarify applicability of "/*" comments > > > > must comment: add rule for documenting spurious variable > > > > assignments > > > > > > > > 6_documenting_software/62_comments.md | 20 +----- > > > > ---- > > > > 6_documenting_software/64_what_you_must_comment.md | 39 > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > README.md | 1 + > > > > 3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.19.1.3.g30247aa5d201 > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#47083): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/47083 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/33157541/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
