Hmm, I don't know about all of these :-)
Is there a bug in the QtCreator settings I gave you? I thought QtCreator
got the continuation lines right...
> @@ -71,8 +71,8 @@ static void uemis_ts(char *buffer, void *_when)
>
> memset(&tm, 0, sizeof(tm));
> sscanf(buffer, "%d-%d-%dT%d:%d:%d",
> - &tm.tm_year, &tm.tm_mon, &tm.tm_mday,
> - &tm.tm_hour, &tm.tm_min, &tm.tm_sec);
> + &tm.tm_year, &tm.tm_mon, &tm.tm_mday,
> + &tm.tm_hour, &tm.tm_min, &tm.tm_sec);
This is an aligned continuation line - you forced this to be tab aligned.
That's not what we do...
> @@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ static void uemis_add_string(const char *buffer, char
> **text, const char *delimi
> static void uemis_get_weight(char *buffer, weightsystem_t *weight, int
> diveid)
> {
> weight->weight.grams = uemis_get_weight_unit(diveid) ?
> - lbs_to_grams(ascii_strtod(buffer, NULL))
> :
> - ascii_strtod(buffer, NULL) * 1000;
> + lbs_to_grams(ascii_strtod(buffer,
> NULL)) :
> + ascii_strtod(buffer, NULL) * 1000;
Ditto
> @@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ static char *next_segment(char *buf, int *offset, int
> size)
> while (!done) {
> if (i < size) {
> if (i < size - 1 && buf[i] == '\\' &&
> - (buf[i + 1] == '\\' || buf[i + 1] == '{'))
> + (buf[i + 1] == '\\' || buf[i + 1] == '{'))
> memcpy(buf + i, buf + i + 1, size - i - 1);
This is the reason why... in your version it's much harder to see that
(buf[i + 1]... is part of the condition.
> @@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ static void uemis_increased_timeout(int *timeout)
>
> /* send a request to the dive computer and collect the answer */
> static bool uemis_get_answer(const char *path, char *request, int n_param_in,
> - int n_param_out, const char **error_text)
> + int n_param_out, const char **error_text)
This one looks valid
> @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ static bool uemis_get_answer(const char *path, char
> *request, int n_param_in,
> for (i = 0; i < n_param_in; i++)
> str_append_with_delim(sb, param_buff[i]);
> if (!strcmp(request, "getDivelogs") || !strcmp(request,
> "getDeviceData") || !strcmp(request, "getDirectory") ||
> - !strcmp(request, "getDivespot") || !strcmp(request, "getDive")) {
> + !strcmp(request, "getDivespot") || !strcmp(request, "getDive"))
> {
See above - harder to read.
> @@ -939,8 +939,8 @@ static char *uemis_get_divenr(char *deviceidstr)
> struct divecomputer *dc;
> for_each_dc (d, dc) {
> if (dc->model && !strcmp(dc->model, "Uemis Zurich") &&
> - (dc->deviceid == 0 || dc->deviceid == 0x7fffffff ||
> dc->deviceid == deviceid) &&
> - dc->diveid > maxdiveid)
> + (dc->deviceid == 0 || dc->deviceid ==
> 0x7fffffff || dc->deviceid == deviceid) &&
> + dc->diveid > maxdiveid)
Ditto.
> @@ -989,13 +989,12 @@ static bool do_dump_buffer_to_file(char *buf, char
> *prefix, int round)
> * filenr holds now the uemis filenr after having read several logs
> including the dive details,
> * fCapacity will five us the average number of files needed for all
> currently loaded data
> * remember the maximum file usage per dive
> - * return : UEMIS_MEM_OK if there is enough memeory for a full round
> - * UEMIS_MEM_CRITICAL if the memory is good for reading the dive
> logs
> - * UEMIS_MEM_FULL if the memory is exhaused
> + * return : UEMIS_MEM_OK if there is enough memeory for a full round
> + * UEMIS_MEM_CRITICAL if the memory is good for reading the
> dive logs
> + * UEMIS_MEM_FULL if the memory is exhaused
> */
meh - I don't really care much about the intricate whitespace insides
comments :-)
Since you wanted a chance to play with git... can you create a new patch
that only includes the ones I didn't call out as wrong?
Thanks
/D
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
