On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:20:43PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 20:13 -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 08:16:12PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
> > >> + for (row = 0; row < ckdev->rows; row++) {
> > >> + if (cros_ec_keyb_row_has_ghosting(ckdev, buf, row))
> > >> + return true;
> > >> + }
> > >
> > > No need for curly braces here. I would not care if not for below.
> >
> > OK I dont't think I even knew about that rule. Actually, what is that rule?
>
> There is no rule, uses with and without braces
> exist in about similar numbers in the kernel.
>
> Both are used ~2000 times.
>
> Newer uses more commonly have braces and I think
> using braces is a better style.
I consider this example of a single statement body (albeit nested) and
therefore no braces are necessary, as mentioned in out coding style.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
