>From my point of view, I will go with the project consensus if there is one. I >prefer the latter, and this is all based on what Mr C++ himself suggests and >strongly recommends in [1] (if the project was written in C I would go with >the former). In Steve's example, p is a Port pointer, and declaring multiple >non-trivial variables (like pointers) on a single line is bad coding style >anyway.
[1] Stroustrup, Bjarne. The C++ Programming Language. 2nd Edition, p. 52. Addison-Wesley. Andreas -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Reinhardt Sent: 11 January 2012 06:28 To: gem5 Developer List Subject: [gem5-dev] style question: * placement for pointers How much do people care about consistency between: Port *p; vs. Port* p; ? The style guide is silent on the matter, but we have traditionally done the former. I see Andreas tends to do the latter in his patches. I expect there are other places where this modern style has slipped in already (kids these days!). Should we encode the former as official style and make Andreas change, or be flexible and let it go? Steve _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
