From: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com>
To: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
Cc: Steven Cole <elenstev@mesatop.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about style when converting from K&R to ANSI C.
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 09:53:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EDA0555.6000202@coyotegulch.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030601132626.GA3012@work.bitmover.com>
Larry McVoy wrote:
>>Proposed conversion:
>>
>>int foo(void)
>>{
>> /* body here */
>>}
>
> which is why I've always preferred
>
> int
> foo(void)
> {
> /* body here */
> }
>
> Is there some reason that I'm missing that the kernel folks like it the other
> way?
Just my personal opinion:
The return value is part of the function signature; placing it on a
separate line implies a disconnect between the return value and the rest
of the declaration.
It's a matter of psychology; your mileage may vary.
--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-01 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-01 5:56 Question about style when converting from K&R to ANSI C Steven Cole
2003-06-01 6:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2003-06-01 6:43 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-06-01 13:14 ` Alan Cox
2003-06-01 19:10 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-06-01 13:26 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 13:49 ` Willy Tarreau
2003-06-01 14:06 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 14:22 ` Willy Tarreau
2003-06-01 15:02 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-01 15:09 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 15:50 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-01 16:02 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 16:18 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-01 23:01 ` Paul Mackerras
2003-06-01 23:30 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-03 3:29 ` Robert White
2003-06-01 16:04 ` Jonathan Lundell
2003-06-01 16:11 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 16:46 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-01 16:52 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-01 17:18 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-02 12:39 ` Jesse Pollard
2003-06-03 3:15 ` Robert White
2003-06-01 13:53 ` Scott Robert Ladd [this message]
2003-06-02 2:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-02 2:21 ` Larry McVoy
2003-06-02 2:26 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-02 3:15 ` Steven Cole
2003-06-02 15:54 ` Erik Hensema
2003-06-03 12:32 ` Martin Waitz
2003-06-03 12:45 ` Dave Jones
2003-06-03 12:51 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-03 13:18 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2003-06-03 13:27 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-06-03 13:39 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-06-03 14:44 ` Henning Schmiedehausen
2003-06-03 15:16 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-06-03 15:25 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-06-03 15:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-06-03 15:40 ` Randy.Dunlap
[not found] <20030601060013$0d74@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030601134006$4765@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030602022006$78ca@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030602160025$70e8@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-06-02 16:09 ` Pascal Schmidt
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=3EDA0555.6000202@coyotegulch.com \
--to=coyote@coyotegulch.com \
--cc=elenstev@mesatop.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
/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