From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <andyw@uk.ibm.com>,
Christer Weinigel <christer@weinigel.se>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] teach checkpatch.pl about list_for_each
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 10:30:36 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080103123036.GB29523@ghostprotocols.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080103122610.GA18255@infradead.org>
Em Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:26:10PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig escreveu:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:10:58AM +0000, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > We have had some stabs at changing this, but no consensus was reached on
> > whether it was a "for" or a "function". My memory is of there being
> > slightly more "without a space" tenders than the other and so it has not
> > been changed. This thread also seems so far to have not really
> > generated a concensus. So I would tend to leave things as they are.
> >
> > A third option might be to accept either on *for_each* constructs.
> > That might tend to lead to divergance. Difficult. However, also see my
> > later comments on "style guide".
>
> Pretty much all core code uses list_for_each_entry( so new code should
> follow that example.
Agreed, CodingStyle is not about mindless consistency such as "for (" is
the right thing, so "list_for_each (" is consistent with it, it is about
codifying practice contributors got used to over the years.
- Arnaldo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-03 12:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-02 12:03 [PATCH] teach checkpatch.pl about list_for_each Christer Weinigel
2007-12-02 13:24 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2007-12-02 19:47 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-03 11:10 ` Andy Whitcroft
2008-01-03 12:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-03 12:30 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2008-01-03 15:17 ` Benny Halevy
2008-01-03 23:12 ` Christer Weinigel
2008-01-03 11:23 ` pHilipp Zabel
2008-01-03 12:34 ` Tomas Carnecky
2008-01-03 23:10 ` Christer Weinigel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080103123036.GB29523@ghostprotocols.net \
--to=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=andyw@uk.ibm.com \
--cc=christer@weinigel.se \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox