On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 09:46:28AM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > Checkpatch recommends since some time to use sizeof(e) instead of sizeof e, > > isn't it ? > > I actually prefer "sizeof e" since sizeof is an operator, not a > function. "sizeof(e)" looks just as silly as "return(e)" to me.
Sizeof is used as an expression, return is not. They have different precedence rules: return e + 1; // == return (e + 1) vs sizeof e + 1; // == sizeof(e) + 1 Or weirder: return (void *)x; // OK vs sizeof (void *)x; // <-- compile error Coding sizeof as a function call frees the reader from having to check/know the obscure precedence rules for sizeof. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
