From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof Halasa Subject: Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: proscribe do-while without braces. Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:00:33 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1185485822.4459.1.camel@josh-work.beaverton.ibm.com> <20070726173501.9ba466ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from khc.piap.pl ([195.187.100.11]:42532 "EHLO khc.piap.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761723AbXG0QAf (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:00:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070726173501.9ba466ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:35:01 -0700") Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Josh Triplett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton writes: > it's better that we all do things the same way. What that way _is_ is > actually less important, unless it's something stupid, of course. It's certainly true WRT things like indentation but IMHO it shouldn't go that far, and if it goes, it should be non-braced version. If we prefer non-braced versions of "if" and "while", it would be a bit strange to require braces with "do while", wouldn't it? Sparse warnings... I think it shouldn't complain either, unless called with extra parameter. Perhaps some pointer to a bad-looking example so I can see for myself? -- Krzysztof Halasa