Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 1/3] decouple spinlock stats from XENO_OPT_STATS

[Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>]

On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 18:09 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>  #ifdef CONFIG_XENO_SPINLOCK_DEBUG
> >> @@ -343,7 +340,7 @@ static inline spl_t __xnlock_get_irqsave
> >>  #else /* !CONFIG_XENO_SPINLOCK_DEBUG */
> >>  static inline spl_t __xnlock_get_irqsave (xnlock_t *lock)
> >>  {
> >> -#endif /* !CONFIG_XENO_SPINLOCK_DEBUG */
> >> +#endif /* CONFIG_XENO_SPINLOCK_DEBUG */
> > 
> > I prefer the notation:
> > 
> > #if cond
> > #endif /* cond */
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > #if cond
> > #else /* !cond */
> > #endif /* !cond */
> > 
> > to
> > 
> > #if cond
> > #endif /* cond */
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > #if cond
> > #else /* !cond */
> > #endif /* cond */
> > 
> > Because in the first case, when I see a #endif in the middle of a lot of
> > code, I immediately know what predicate is true above the #endif.
> > 
> 
> Ok, I understand the logic. Nevertheless, I had the impression the first
> scheme is used far more often than the second one in Xenomai and I-pipe,
> so I took the chance to consolidate the code.

Basically because I wrote those using the first convention.

> 
> So, what should be the common rule from now on? Is there a kernel-style
> rule for this issue we should follow, or are we free and should convert
> to your preferred scheme?
> 

Let's move to Gilles's convention; it's more readable.

> Jan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xenomai-core mailing list
> Xenomai-core@domain.hid
> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
-- 
Philippe.