From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754788Ab3JFVsh (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2013 17:48:37 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:48496 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754522Ab3JFVsg (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2013 17:48:36 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 50.43.39.152 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 14:48:29 -0700 From: Josh Triplett To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Preferred line-break style around binary operators? Message-ID: <20131006214829.GA20112@leaf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org There are two common approaches to breaking long lines at binary operators: breaking the line before the operator (putting the operator at the start of the next line), or breaking the line after the operator (putting the operator at the end of the previous line). CodingStyle doesn't define any requirement here, and the kernel uses both approaches; for instance, using && as a sample: $ git grep -h '&&$' | wc -l 28872 $ git grep -h '^[[:space:]]*&&' | wc -l 4169 Which style should kernel code use? I can submit a CodingStyle patch documenting that preference for future reference. - Josh Triplett