From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from a.ns.miles-group.at ([95.130.255.143] helo=radon.swed.at) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ScNnx-0003Ii-NS for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 21:30:17 +0000 Message-ID: <4FCFCBE3.9000508@nod.at> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 23:30:11 +0200 From: Richard Weinberger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] UBI: fastmap: kill junk newlines and add a TODO about that References: <1338909119-5188-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> <1338909119-5188-3-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1338909119-5188-3-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigF1CE97D8FC582E4C77288E0B" Cc: MTD Maling List , Shmulik Ladkani List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigF1CE97D8FC582E4C77288E0B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 05.06.2012 17:11, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy: > + /* TODO: nitpick, sorry for being annoying, but this should not > + * be difficult to fix. I find it very irritating when there > + * are useless blank lines like this - they only make less code > + * fit my screen and make large functions even larger. > + * > + * Why we use blank lines inside a single function? To make > + * code more readable. How we make it more readable? By > + * separating logically different blocks of code with a > + * newline. > + * > + * What is the perbose of these newlines before goto's? This is > + * a single piece of error-handling code - you assing the > + * return value and go to the further error processing. These > + * newlines serve no purpose just blow the lines number in the > + * code. Could we please kill them globally? > + * > + * I am again sorry - probably this is not completely > + * technical, but I gave the explanation why these newlines are > + * annying. And as a person who spent a lot of personal > + * (non-paid) time maintaining this code and who will keep > + * doing this - I think I have right to require to do such > + * cosmetic things :-) If you do not agree with my reasoning, > + * may be this is better - you'll keep me happier :-) */ > goto out; Your and mine coding style are quite different. :-) I *hate* it when statements like goto and return are glued to a code bloc= k. E.g. a =3D 1 + b; res =3D c + a; return res; vs: a =3D 1 + b; res =3D c + a; return res; Anyway, I'll change this to match the UBI style. Thanks, //richard P.s: Can we please have a ubi_checkpatch.pl? *SCNR* --------------enigF1CE97D8FC582E4C77288E0B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPz8vjAAoJEN9758yqZn9e1CAIAM5zJLEoAcmviNv+49qFk2qi gP/Xxcx2UgSUKy0Husmo/+mgZAVXgsZdQ0u1Oz1DeJjBqN90h4zkCJJPK81csYux gq52EjQ/sDilBcI5M7/MuflBro24d8qbCcvfDF1MkyLjFnco1xyHVWY+il4ijtHj abbHkubfziyfgBQQ3+wC32i010l6/muj7c0S983SiIshC8jcM32C3m/yWZ5JPnqE jqSmu7HhGYqjBT/tS2Kb/mL5cv0eO4UtSDQwqPb9TzS3HEYA43+WldjISPt11Iad uU1XItqdftv7D9dhbmZM0V8cq4tcZrWpxKqvCeg6XnU/Nv6JnIxig+vb0vbOFQI= =WqCF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigF1CE97D8FC582E4C77288E0B--