I thought that we had agreed to always use braces for control structures
(for, if, while, etc.) since that makes it easier to add/remove lines
without worrying about adding/removing braces too. I don't see it mentioned
either way on the coding style page, but I know I've developed the habit of
Also, please make these sorts of large scale formatting changes
judiciously. There's a large collection of patches out there and it can
be non-trivial to keep them applying correctly.
Gabe
Steve Reinhardt wrote:
I thought that we had agreed to always use braces for control
structures (for,
I thought that we had agreed to always use braces for control structures
(for, if, while, etc.) since that makes it easier to add/remove lines
without worrying about adding/removing braces too. I don't see it mentioned
either way on the coding style page, but I know I've developed the habit
I don't really have a strong opinion either way; the #1 thing is that we
should agree and get it down on the wiki page so that these style updates
converge rather than oscillating.
Agreed. What do you think about my above statement? If the whole
expression fits in two lines, no
I think that sounds fine. Does no braces required also mean no braces
allowed, or is that something left up to the implementers discretion? I
think it should be optional rather than forbidden.
I'd agree with optional.
___
m5-dev mailing list
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 9:35 PM, nathan binkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that sounds fine. Does no braces required also mean no braces
allowed, or is that something left up to the implementers discretion? I
think it should be optional rather than forbidden.
I'd agree with
Optional is OK with me, but in that case it's not something that should be
fixed in a style update.
True, my bad. I was just going really fast.
Nate
___
m5-dev mailing list
m5-dev@m5sim.org
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
