On Fri, 4 Dec 2015, Bryan Drewery wrote:
On 12/4/2015 10:03 AM, Bruce Evans wrote:
This is specified by not giving an example of using it. style(9) was
I really take issue with this stance. I don't think you really mean what
this implies. For example, can I even use 'x++' or mtx_lock(9) or
uintptr_t since they are not shown in an example?
mtx_lock() is just another function, so it doesn't need an example any
more than printf(). printf() also happens to have no example, but there
is a formal rule for it an example for fprintf().
'++' is just a standard operator. style(9) happens to have an example
of it, though not on a variable named x. It even has the bad example
of ++p instead of p++ where the result is not used. ++p is more logical
and I used to prefer it, but only p++ is KNF-normal.
style(9) has even more detailed rules for uintXX_t, but no examples,
and nothing for uintptr_t. uintptr_t can be considered as just another
typedef. The rule about uintXX_t is mainly part of deprecating the
old spelling u_intXX_t.
I wouldn't trust style(9) for anything except simple formatting, but
look at the subsystem(s) style. Just the top level of geom has 11000+
lines which can be considered as giving about 20 times more examples
than style(9).
Bruce
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
