Re: Breaking lines in function headers

[Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>]

On Tue, 19 May 2015, Wim de With wrote:

> What is the correct way to break lines in a function header? The coding
> style guide is not very clear about it. For example:
>
> 1.
> static struct very_long_struct_name
> *do_something_interesting(struct *another_long_struct_name)
>
> 2.
> static struct very_long_struct_name *do_something_interesting(
> 				struct *another_long_struct_name)

I don't recall ever seeing the second one.  But perhaps one doesn't see
what one doesn't look for.  In the first one, it seems odd to separate the
* from the rest of the return type.  I would think it would be very easy
to miss/misinterpret alone before the function name.

julia

> Which one of these is the correct way to do it? I see the second one
> used more often, and the coding style guide states "Descendants are
> always substantially shorter than the parent and are placed
> substantially to the right. The same applies to function headers with a
> long argument list.", so I am inclined to say it is the correct way of
> doing it. But if it is, how many tabs should I use? How should I align
> the arguments if the list is longer, and I need more line breaks?
>
> Thanks
>
> Wim
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>