>>> On 21.02.18 at 16:34, wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> +When signedness matters, qualify plain char, short, int, long, and
>> +long long with "signed" or "unsigned". Signedness is specifically
>> +considered to
On 02/21/2018 03:55 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 19/02/18 13:30, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.02.18 at 14:12, wrote:
>>> On 19/02/18 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
--- a/CODING_STYLE
+++ b/CODING_STYLE
@@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks
On 19/02/18 13:30, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.02.18 at 14:12, wrote:
>> On 19/02/18 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> --- a/CODING_STYLE
>>> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
>>> @@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
>>> if ( condition )
>>>
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>
> --- a/CODING_STYLE
> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
> @@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
> if ( condition )
> single_statement();
>
> +Types
> +-
> +
>>> On 19.02.18 at 14:39, wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH RFC] CODING_STYLE: document intended usage of
> types"):
>> Types to be used for addresses - from a really generic pov -
>> depend on the architecture. Iirc there are some where a signed
>> type is the
Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH RFC] CODING_STYLE: document intended usage of
types"):
> Types to be used for addresses - from a really generic pov -
> depend on the architecture. Iirc there are some where a signed
> type is the more natural representation, while on x86 and ARM
> we'd certainly
>>> On 19.02.18 at 14:12, wrote:
> On 19/02/18 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/CODING_STYLE
>> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
>> @@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
>> if ( condition )
>> single_statement();
>>
>> +Types
>> +-
>> +
>> +Use
On 19/02/18 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>
> --- a/CODING_STYLE
> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
> @@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
> if ( condition )
> single_statement();
>
> +Types
> +-
> +
> +Use basic C types and C
>>> On 19.02.18 at 12:46, wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("[PATCH RFC] CODING_STYLE: document intended usage of
> types"):
>> +Types
>> +-
>> +
>> +Use basic C types and C standard mandated typedef-s where possible (and
>> +with preference in this order). This in
Jan Beulich writes ("[PATCH RFC] CODING_STYLE: document intended usage of
types"):
> +Types
> +-
> +
> +Use basic C types and C standard mandated typedef-s where possible (and
> +with preference in this order). This in particular means to avoid u8,
> +u16, etc despite those types continuing
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
--- a/CODING_STYLE
+++ b/CODING_STYLE
@@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
if ( condition )
single_statement();
+Types
+-
+
+Use basic C types and C standard mandated typedef-s where possible (and
+with preference
11 matches
Mail list logo