Jan Kiszka wrote:
 > I don't see an urgent need to go and change the whole code to kernel
 > coding style, I only see the need to keep one consistent style across
 > the code. This just may require a bit more iterations for "third-party"
 > contributed patches.
 > 
 > Ok, the ipipe patch as the part being integrated in the kernel, that one
 > should conform to kernel style to make it easier readable for inflexible
 > kernel hackers. But for the rest (which will very likely never made it
 > into the kernel), we should decide based on a broader basis than just
 > "follow the kernel herd".
 > 
 > Personally, I don't like hard-tabs (think they are too often misused to
 > format text alignment instead of just indenting code blocks), but I can
 > live with any style - as long as it is consistent and comprehensible.
 > Now as we already have such a style, why to change it right now? I would
 > say: just enforce it.

I don't like hard-tabs either, I guess kernel people are using them to
save disk space, but since Xenomai sources are not large, we have no
reason to use them.

As for braces placement, I used to dislike Xenomai style (where
does it come from anyway, BSD ?), but got accustomed to it; after all,
it is readable. Anyway, I prefer the kernel style, except for the 8
spaces "c-basic-offset" to talk in emacs cc-mode language...

I would also prefer avoiding the stupid naming rules I had to follow in
some companies.

-- 


                                            Gilles Chanteperdrix.

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to